Qustion on new Sigma lens

Amoore00357

TPF Noob!
Joined
Jun 16, 2011
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
I am deciding on two lenses and i don't know for sure which one i want to get.
First is the sigma 150-500 and the second in the 120-400.
I am planing on using the lens for wildlife and maybe pictures of family sport activities.
I would buy a 2x converter and use it when im taking pictures of wildlife for sure.
I use a canon 60D.
So my question is which one do you think is better between the 120-400 or 150-500 and also should i get a 1.4 converter or a 2x converter?
Thanks!
 
the two lens are simular
what lens do you already have
how fast are the lens your looking at buying
what is the price difference between the lens
 
I heard the 120-400 is a better lens overall, but if you need the reach, get the 500 i guess
its a pretty slow lens already so keep in mind that a converter will kill F stops.
 
When you use a 2x teleconveter you also lose 2 stops of maximum aperture, which would make f/6.3 - f/13 on the 150-500 when it is zoomed to 500 mm, and f/5.6 - f/11 on the 120-400. Consider the implications to the resultant DOF, and it means you'll also lose 2 stops of shutter speed. Unless you crank in 2 stops of ISO and can live with the increased image noise to get the shutter speed stops back.
 
I'm actually planning on getting the 70-200 2.8 Sigma with the 2x TC to compensate for the stop-loss the TC will introduce. Plus the 70-200 is cheaper than Nikon's offering.

Hopefully before the end of the year I'll pull the trigger on the purchase, next up for me is an UWA :)
 
thanks for the info
i herd that before about the 120-400 being overall a little better other then the farther zoom part i just wanted to see if there were others that had the same idea
 
I thought that the 120-400 was the lower-quality lens, and the older 50-500, and the 150-500 OS were supposed to be "better" lenses...

As far as a converter goes...get a 1.4x **if you must***. These long, slowish zoom lenses are NOT designed to be used with any converter!!! A 2x converter is going to be usable only in the very-brightest conditions. Sigma's better line of converters are actually pretty good, but the thing is, with lenses as slow as this, the loss of one f/stop of light with a 1.4x, and two full stops' worth with a 23x converter puts the effective maximum aperture values below what is need for autofocusing, and it will force you to use high ISO values in order to get a shutter speed that's fast enough to freeze motion with the linger focal lengths.

NOw that we're shooting digital, the better solution is to shoot, and then crop in at the computer.
 
From the research I've done... the 50-500 is actually a good deal sharper than 150-500, and now it's available with OS.
 
but out of the two 120-400 and 150-500 which one would u think is better because for the income i have the 50-500 is a little out of range for me or else i would of got that one
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
My rule of thumb is RUN don't walk from any Sigma lens. Sorry if I offended anyone, but experience has taught me their quality control SUCKS!
 
And my experience is just the opposite. But those 2 150-500 Sigma lenses I had are the only 2 Sigma lenses I have ever owned.

About 2 years ago Sigma was having quality control issues. Some lense had issues, most didn't. Their service department had issues too.

That was then, and Sigma hassince improved their controls.

Look! 3rd party lenses are reverse engineered. Nikon, Canon, Sony, et al, don't give 3rd party gear makers their proprietary information.

So if you buy 3rd party gear to save money, understand how it is that the 3rd party gear costs less. The 3rd party gear makers use lower grade materials, and take more short cuts during the manufacturing process.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top