Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 AF APO DG OS HSM Telephoto Zoom Lens

nobody

Anybody have this lense? If so, are you happy with it? I am considering it. It's going for about $980 on amazon. My intended use would be sports, and occasionally wild life in good light. With the narrow aperture, it's pretty much limited to full daylight, or at worst cloudy conditions. Does autofocus work well on this lense?

In my mind, it's closest competitor is the Canon 100 mm - 400 mm - f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM which sells for a little over $200 more and is a 100 mm shorter.

Tee Why

From what I hear, the optics are at a similar level to the sigma 50-500mm which is just below the Canon 100-400mm.

I've heard mixed things about the AF. Some say it's slow, some say it's ok.

The OS seems to take a few seconds to settle down and the lens is f6.3 from 300mm on IIRC.

Here is a review by Jojo, who is excellent at comparing lenses and has vast first hand knowledge on many lenses for the Canon mount.

http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/bigmos

nobody

Tee Why wrote:

From what I hear, the optics are at a similar level to the sigma 50-500mm which is just below the Canon 100-400mm.

I've heard mixed things about the AF. Some say it's slow, some say it's ok.

The OS seems to take a few seconds to settle down and the lens is f6.3 from 300mm on IIRC.

Here is a review by Jojo, who is excellent at comparing lenses and has vast first hand knowledge on many lenses for the Canon mount.

http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/bigmos

Thanks for the info. From reading that review, it sounds like the greatest weakness of that lense is slow autofocusing. He mentioned 1.5 seconds max time to autofocus, but I suppose it would be a lot quicker if you're already most of the way there. I think it's greatest advantage over the 50 - 500 would be the OS (optical stabilization).

swintonphoto

nobody wrote:

I think it's greatest advantage over the 50 - 500 would be the OS (optical stabilization).

And the size. The 50-500 is a beast.

RayLarson

I just got that lens for my Nikon D80 and I love it. Go to "People" and you can see some pictures I took last week. It is quick to focus and the IQ is great. It work outstanding in good light and with high ISO it holds it's own. The OS is good for 3 to 4 stops and works great.

RayLarson

Here is my post on "People" with sample Pictures from that lens

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=98993

mike_flood

nobody wrote:

Anybody have this lense? If so, are you happy with it? I am considering it. It's going for about $980 on amazon. My intended use would be sports, and occasionally wild life in good light. With the narrow aperture, it's pretty much limited to full daylight, or at worst cloudy conditions. Does autofocus work well on this lense?

In my mind, it's closest competitor is the Canon 100 mm - 400 mm - f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM which sells for a little over $200 more and is a 100 mm shorter.

Are you speaking of the Sigma 170-500mm? I have that lens in the Nikon mount. I find the contrast noticeably weaker than my other Nikkor lenses.
I took it out in cold weather (Illinois winter about 20 degrees) and the lens hood (plastic) contracted so much that I couldn't remove it until I got it warmed up some.
I would like to sell it but haven't made a real effort to. It's almost like new even though it's 4 years old.

RayLarson

mike_flood wrote:

Are you speaking of the Sigma 170-500mm? I have that lens in the Nikon mount. I find the contrast noticeably weaker than my other Nikkor lenses.
I took it out in cold weather (Illinois winter about 20 degrees) and the lens hood (plastic) contracted so much that I couldn't remove it until I got it warmed up some.
I would like to sell it but haven't made a real effort to. It's almost like new even though it's 4 years old.

No Mike, this is a new lens from Sigma 150-500 with OS.

RayLarson

First shot taken with my new Sigma 150-500 OS. An off the hip shot at f5, 150mm and ISO 900. Wasn't meant to be a keeper but it shows the lens wide open at a slow shutter speed 1/30th. I must say I'm pleased

Art Scott

could/would you link the above pic to the original so we could see it really large???

Thanks

RayLarson

OK here is the large size:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3209/2655804033_244e8a2529_b.jpg

and the original:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3209/2655804033_e8b7a40c2f_o.jpg

As I mentioned, this was taken off the cuff, no preparation and very poor lighting. Just wanted to get a feel for the lens.

nobody

RayLarson wrote:

Here is my post on "People" with sample Pictures from that lens

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=98993

Not bad for a $1000 lense of that focal length. I know that for something like catching a batter batting a ball, having a fast autofocus is not that big of an issue, since you would have already focused on or near the batter before you took the shot. Your photos have established that the lense is capable of performing well hand-held for long distance shots, something the old 50-500 apparently did not do well, since it has no stabilization. One thing I'm still curious about: if you do action shots at the 400 - 500 mm range, is the autofocus quick enough to keep up when you've got the subject running toward or away from the camera? If so, then the Canon version of that lense will probably be one of the next major items on my list.

RayLarson

nobody wrote:

Not bad for a $1000 lense of that focal length. I know that for something like catching a batter batting a ball, having a fast autofocus is not that big of an issue, since you would have already focused on or near the batter before you took the shot. Your photos have established that the lense is capable of performing well hand-held for long distance shots, something the old 50-500 apparently did not do well, since it has no stabilization. One thing I'm still curious about: if you do action shots at the 400 - 500 mm range, is the autofocus quick enough to keep up when you've got the subject running toward or away from the camera? If so, then the Canon version of that lense will probably be one of the next major items on my list.

My suggestion would be to try one out if you can find one at a local dealer. It really is not a sports lens but does have capabilities. My copy has quick focus with the HSM motor. When I get time I plan to test it out. I know in sunlight or decent light it should be no problem at all