Sigma 100-400 -> Nikon 200-500 Review

Started 2 months ago | Discussions
bryand7k
bryand7k Contributing Member • Posts: 957
Sigma 100-400 -> Nikon 200-500 Review
9

I have had a Sigma 150-600 and even tried a 200-500 before but wasn't impressed with the 500 end.

I live in the North West and while I liked the 150-600 i was shooting it at 7.1 and being retired thought something sharper and lighter would be better and so got the Sigma 100-400, I did try the Tamron 100-400 noted for it's faster AF when it came out ... but no go. I was able to shoot it wide open and found immediately that it helped with lowering ISO and/or shutter speeds. I really loved the 100mm vs the 150 for landscapes. It was the AF speed that bothered me the most and while the lens is sharp I wanted more.

So after a fortuitous accident I need to replace my cam(D500)/lens. I decided to try the 200-500 and loved the extra reach and sharpness at 500! It's a keeper for me. The known issues of having to turn the zoom ring for ever haven't really bothered me and despite the 3 Kg + weight I still shoot handheld but have tried my tripod under certain conditions at home.

Overall i think the AF is faster/better then the Sig 100-400 but find when focused on distant things and then trying focus closer it'll bog down and cause missed shots.

One of the other comments I'd heard about it was that it wasn't really any good for close up stuff. Well ... it's as good as any other similar lens as far as I can tell.

Being a constant 5.6 it helps a lot at the 500 end, vs. 6.3, away form places like California or Florida.

The 200-500 comes with a tripod collar and the 100-400 doesn't. Some say the foot isn't that great but unless your doing macro type work it doesn't matter for wildlife where your really just using the tripod to support the weight

Do I regret getting the Sig 100-400 .... NO and really think a 100-500 would be a perfect range. That new Sig 60-600 sounded interesting but it's even heavier and to pricey to consider

So .. ratings .... Sigma 100-400:   3.5/5            Nikon 200-500: 4.25/5

and now a few obligatory shots: click on original for best results

focused stacked off tripod

 bryand7k's gear list:bryand7k's gear list
Nikon D500 Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM | C Nikon 200-500mm F5.6E ED VR
Entropius Veteran Member • Posts: 4,354
Re: Sigma 100-400 -> Nikon 200-500 Review
2

The first and last shots are prizes!

 Entropius's gear list:Entropius's gear list
Nikon D500 Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Art Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4E PF ED VR
Standy
Standy New Member • Posts: 8
Re: Sigma 100-400 -> Nikon 200-500 Review

Such great shots! Thanks for sharing!

 Standy's gear list:Standy's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF Nikkor 105mm f/2D DC Tokina AT-X Pro 100mm f/2.8 Macro +7 more
bjn70 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,401
Re: Sigma 100-400 -> Nikon 200-500 Review

Your conclusions sound like what I have read about the 2 lenses.  However what you didn't say was that there are big differences in weight and cost between the 2 lenses.  I bought the Sigma because it was within my budget and also because its size/weight was such that I could carry it in my bag for "just in case" opportunities.  I could  not do that with the bigger Nikon although if I had the budget I would like to own one.

bryand7k
OP bryand7k Contributing Member • Posts: 957
Re: Sigma 100-400 -> Nikon 200-500 Review

bjn70 wrote:

Your conclusions sound like what I have read about the 2 lenses. However what you didn't say was that there are big differences in weight and cost between the 2 lenses. I bought the Sigma because it was within my budget and also because its size/weight was such that I could carry it in my bag for "just in case" opportunities. I could not do that with the bigger Nikon although if I had the budget I would like to own one.

I didn't spell it out but at 3kg including the cam the Nikon is about 2x as heavy as the Sigma and the 150-600s are noticeably heavier too.

Yes the price back when i got the 100-400 was like about $650 more and I couldn't swing that price increase either then. As my insurance paid for the replacement equipment I was able to get the D500 and 200-500 on sale for about the same price as I originally invested so I went for it. 

 bryand7k's gear list:bryand7k's gear list
Nikon D500 Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM | C Nikon 200-500mm F5.6E ED VR
Cariboou
Cariboou Senior Member • Posts: 2,947
Re: Sigma 100-400 -> Nikon 200-500 Review

Well enjoy your new great lens, is heavy but for the price you never get something better...

In this case I shot with my D810

-- hide signature --

Cheers
Cariboou!
https://adobe.ly/2vaiB3I

 Cariboou's gear list:Cariboou's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF VR Nikon 200-500mm F5.6E ED VR Nikon AF-S 70-200mm F2.8E FL ED VR
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads