Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    TPF Noob!
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    5
    My Gallery
    (0)
    Liked
    0 times

    Sigma 120-400mm vs 150-500mm Please Help!!

    I am a relatively advanced photo hobbyist and I currently own a Canon Rebel XSI with the Tamron 18-250mm superzoom that I use as a multi-purpose lens as well as the Canon 50mm f/1.4 prime which I use for taking pictures of friends and family. Recently though I have started to get into wildlife photography and have found that my Tamron is not nearly long enough and that it is unacceptably soft past 200mm. Therefore I am looking for a long, relatively sharp telephoto lens to use for wildlife but would also like to be able to use it for sports such as football. My budget is $1,000 and I can absolutely not spend any more and would prefer to spend less (bigma and Canon's 100-400L are out) and I must have IS/OS/VC as I will often be shooting handheld. I think I have narrowed it down to one of these two lenses given my price range:

    Sigma 120-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG APO OS HSM
    or
    Sigma 150-500mm F5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM

    If anyone has another option under $1,000 please let me know

    Now given the fact that will often use this lens for wildlife I'm sure you all would suggest the 150-500mm purely for the 500mm focal length which I admit would be nice however for my situation there are several benefits of the 120-400:

    Lighter/Smaller: not sure I want to carry a four pound lens around that much and it might be hard to handhold

    Faster: Even with OS I still think the faster aperture will come in handy while handholding

    Wider: 150mm may be to long for some sports situations especially if I am close to the sidelines although I'm not sure if 120mm will be much better- I can always use my Tamron and just suck up the lower IQ

    Cheaper: For most of you it might not matter but for me saving $100 is a good deal

    Image sensor: remember I have a APS-C crop sensor so 400mm may be plenty of zoom

    Anyone that has either of these lenses or knows a lot about them please give me your opinion of which one would be better for me or an alternative that would serve my purposes

    Thank You!



  2. #2
    TPF Noob!
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    5
    My Gallery
    (0)
    Liked
    0 times
    Please?

  3. #3
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    10,280
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    2076 times
    Digital Cameras: Digital Photography Review, News, Reviews, Forums, FAQ is always a good site to check reviews on products so you can compare. You can also look at people's review on B&H website on the product.
    USAGANI.COM - FACEBOOK
    5D3, 5D2, 15mm f/2.8 fisheye, 24-70 f/2.8L II, 35 f/1.4L, 50 f/1.4, Minolta 58 f/1.2, Tamron 90 f/2.8 macro, 135 f/2L
    Fuji x100s

  4. #4
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Posts
    1,918
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    1 times
    I tried out a 150-500 once and was quite impressed with image quality so either would probably be fine, go for what you need, if its the cheaper lens, so be it. H

  5. #5
    KmH
    KmH is offline
    Helping photographers learn to fish
    TPF Supporter

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    33,477
    My Gallery
    (1)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    3885 times
    I have a Sigma 150-500 and find it well worth the price.

    You need to know that even with OS, a monopod is almost essential, because weight is a consideration.

    Also neither lens has sufficient maximum aperture to shoot at night or in low light. What looks to your eye as a brightly lit football field, isn't sufficiently lit for using f/4.5 to f/6.3 with an APS-C camera sensor. If the football games are day games, you'll be good to go.

    The APS-C sensor just isn't big enough to have the kind of high ISO capability needed to get the shutter speed short enough for shooting action sports at the middle apertures both lenses provide.

    . . . . . . Keith . . . . . . .How Do I Use My Digital SLR?...
    A lot of people go through life doing things badly. Racingís important to men who do it well. When youíre racing, it... itís life. Anything that happens before or after... is just waiting. - Michael Delaney

  6. #6
    Mr. Rain Cloud
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,523
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    9163 times
    My impression was that the 120-400mm lens is not that good of a performer...
    "It's about time people started taking photography seriously, and treating it as a hobby." Elliott Erwitt

    My most recent photos posted to TPF http://www.pbase.com/derrel/recent_tpf_uploads

 

 

Ads

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Sigma 150-500mm
    By beni_hung in forum Photography Equipment & Products
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-12-2010, 01:06 PM
  2. Sigma 120-400mm vs 150-500mm
    By Moellertime in forum Film Discussion and Q & A
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-21-2010, 03:24 PM
  3. New Sigma 50-500mm OS
    By icassell in forum Photography Equipment & Products
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 04-24-2010, 07:31 AM
  4. Sigma 170-500mm or Tonica 80-400mm
    By asiadrabik in forum Photography Equipment & Products
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-15-2008, 11:10 PM
  5. Sigma 50-500mm F4.0-6.3 APO EX RF HSM AF????
    By TTPeter in forum Photography Equipment & Products
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-27-2006, 10:34 AM

Search tags for this page

sigma 120-400
,

sigma 120-400 vs 150-500

,

sigma 120-400 vs sigma 150-500

,
sigma 120-400mm review
,

sigma 120-400mm vs 150-500mm

,

sigma 120-400mm vs sigma 150-500mm

,
sigma 150-500mm vs sigma 120-400mm
,
sigma 400mm vs sigma 500mm
Click on a term to search for related topics.