Telezoom for Sigma SD 15

Hello, I bought a SD15 today and am now looking for a suitable telephoto zoom. I do not have much money available. Can you recommend me something? I would prefer the Sigma 70-300, or the 18-200 or 55-200. I would like to use it mainly for wildlife photography. Thanks in advance!

Jhnns wrote:

Hello, I bought a SD15 today and am now looking for a suitable telephoto zoom. I do not have much money available. Can you recommend me something? I would prefer the Sigma 70-300, or the 18-200 or 55-200. I would like to use it mainly for wildlife photography. Thanks in advance!

Jhnns,

The newer 70-300mm  or the 18-200mm or 18-300mm would be good for you, I think.

S

Dear Ceistinne,

thank you! What do you mean with "newer"?

Best wishes!

Maybe a scroll through this lot might help:

https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/sigma/reviews/#zoomLenses

Did your SD15 come with any lenses? Do you have any prime lenses for it to see what the camera can do, image wise? I've probably used the SD15 recently more than any other current forum readers, as I was trying out my older lenses on the 2013 era SD15 over the past month.

So, here's the problem. Current production Sigma lenses are not inexpensive. In US$ the 18-300mm OS (stabilized) is about $569, it would be my recommendation. An older lens to get the mm you want might be the 28-300mm. I've used it on my SD15 in August with good results. Problem will be finding a used one of this or any other older lens, ie not in current production. I have an old 55-200mm which I will shoot with this weekend and let you know how good it is with the SD15. It was a basic kit lens for SD9/10/14s back in early 2000s. My 17-70mm OS works nicely on the SD15 but you want something longer. Hmm. The 70-200mm EX is a huge, heavy lens. I don't think I've ever used a 70-300 ? I have many SD15 photos for your reference in 2 albums ony Flickr .com page under my name Sandy Fleischmann

Jhnns wrote:

Dear Ceistinne,

thank you! What do you mean with "newer"?

Best wishes!

Jhnns,

As stated by Atom 14.

S

rick decker wrote:

300x1.7 is 510 70-300 is your best choice

400x1.7 is 680 Optaically stabilized and a better lens but more money. 100-400 C OS

I can attest to the fact that even with a 1.7 crop factor, you'll wish you had bought the 100-400. It's a good compromise between weight, price, and maximum focal length, and it's very sharp. If you can handle a heavier lens, then by all means get the 60-600 OS Sport, or an older 50-500 OS, but those are very big and bulky. If you want a new lens, you probably can't go wrong with the affordable 100-400 OS C. That lens can be tuned with your computer to work better with your camera too, if you get the USB dock.

Something to keep in mind is with your 1.7x crop factor at 400mm you get about the equivalent view of a 700mm lens on a full-frame  camera. I figure that's nice, but pretty much a minimum. You may even wish you had a longer lens. You might try a 50-500 EX OS. I believe that's a really good performer too. I'm not into the newer, big 600mm lenses.

Hello all and many thanks for all the information! I have already made very satisfactory (for me) bird photographs with 300mm (FF) (I try to get very close) and think that you can get good bird portraits with about 500mm. I don't need more than that. Also, money is an important factor. So I would be more interested in how the standard lenses like the 55-200, the 18-200 and the 70-300 perform. Which one is the best optically? Thanks again!

rick decker wrote:

300x1.7 is 510 70-300 is your best choice

400x1.7 is 680 Optaically stabilized and a better lens but more money. 100-400 C OS

I found around the house a 70-300mm f/4-5.6 lens  which I haven't used since my SD10 days. I shot a series of photos with this lens and the SD15 and will process them and get them online for you later today.

Couple observations in addition to Rick's comments and other readers' ideas. Optical stabilization makes a huge difference in photographer 'shake'. I can't hand-hold at the shutter speeds I was getting at 200mm and 300mm at ISO100. I took some series increasing the ISO from ISO 100 to 200, 400, 800.

I've taken decent indoor museum or churches photos hand-held at ISO400. I won't use ISO800 unless I'm truly desperate. I normally shoot outdoors or where allowed  with a monopod. It's not as stable as a tripod but makes a great  difference for me as compared to totally hand-held.

Roger wrote:

<>

Also do not believe the crap you hear or read about the Foveon not doing high ISO/ASA <>

Good to know ...

... much encouraged, I tried my Foveon at 400 ISO:

Ted, LOL. On the other hand, I have had fair success with hand-held indoor museum shots of Chinese bronzes and statuary in the Washington, DC, Sackler Gallery at ISO400. For example, below.  Many more of bronzes in my SD15 first album on flickr. com Lighting there is better than lamplight.....

https://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann/8590398566/in/album-72157632811583685/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann/8590336958/in/album-72157632811583685/

Sandy Fleischmann name at flickr. com

SandyF wrote:

Ted, LOL. On the other hand, I have had fair success with hand-held indoor museum shots of Chinese bronzes and statuary in the Washington, DC, Sackler Gallery at ISO400. For example, below. <>

Impressive museum shots, Sandy!!

I enjoyed my SD15 too ... one of Sigma's most under-rated cameras.

Remember the reviews ... what, no video ??!!!

yeah, but the SD15 has flash! I love it. Seriously, it solved all the problems of the SD14. But then the Merrill sensor DP cameras were released and the SD15 was forgotten, as it didn't have the perfect lenses and resolution of the Merrills. I stopped using the SD15 too and all my lenses in favor of DPMerrills.(added) (until I bought the SD Quattro last month and dug out my lenses.)

Okay, I'm putting up a gallery of 70-300mm shots for our original poster. BIg disclaimer: they're pretty bad. I cannot hand-hold that lens at the speeds needed. I'll put up a link to the album when I get them all online. The 'best' of the series @ 300mm actually turn out to be @ ISO400 because I can get the 1/x speed up and in afternoon light, there is little noise. But I see why I stopped using the 70-300mm. I personally liked then and now the 28-300mm much better at the 200-300mm length, easier to hold (for me). BTW I bought Chunsum Choi's 70-200mmEX and I can't hold that bulky lens! Still have it. I think I have every lens I've ever bought except the Pentax and Canon 5DII cameras/lenses I gave to son and son-in-law.

some of the samples are online at https://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann/albums/72177720301398366

Again, disclaimer: they're pretty bad. I cannot hand-hold that lens under 1/125 or so, so I increased the ISO for the 300mm shots. Focus point was butterfly bush blossom, hoping for butterflies (nope) RAW processed in SPP6.8.2 daylight wb standard colormode VERY lightly edited.

In the same SD15 album on flickr you will see some examples of the 28-300mm lens, which I personally prefer to the 70-300mm. It's lighter and less unwieldy.

Dear Sandy, thank you for all your effort and the many examples! I am still thinking ... and there are not many lenses on offer here. Since I don't have a lens for the Sigma SD yet, I'm thinking if an 18-200 wouldn't be a good solution for now. I could get one here Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS. What do you think about it? Is this usable? Thank you very much!

Jhnns wrote:

Dear Sandy, thank you for all your effort and the many examples! I am still thinking ... and there are not many lenses on offer here. Since I don't have a lens for the Sigma SD yet, I'm thinking if an 18-200 wouldn't be a good solution for now. I could get one here Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS. What do you think about it? Is this usable? Thank you very much!

There are two models of Sigma 18-200mm lens, the later one having "II" at the end of the model name.

The original model is pretty poor, see blur test result:

https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/sigma/18-200mm-f3.5-6.3-dc-os-hsm/blur/d200-(2010)/

Set the sliders to 36mm at f/5.6 ... absolutely horrible ...

I had the later model II (not tested by imaging-resource) which wasn't that bad - but I do recall not being greatly impressed by it at any setting.

@DocMike wrote:

"Cons: Not very sharp at the tele end, overall no good contrast and details; not suitable for landscape

Pros: versatile zoom for travel and street photography, wide angle fairly good quality

Summary: Best buy for all-in-one lens"

https://www.lenstip.com/index.html?producent=73&obiektyw=1008&typ=0&moc=0&sort=

As always, caveat emptor ...

Hm, hm, hm – thank you! It seems difficult to find an inexpensive useful lens. What's about the 55-200: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/sigma-55-200-f-4-5-6-dc-4341

It seems not too bad!?

Can lenses from analog Sigma cameras be used with the SD15? Thanks for all your comments and ideas!