matthewo
Been spending a lot of time on here!
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2011
- Messages
- 1,445
- Reaction score
- 645
- Location
- the south
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
To start off I would like to say, this is not a technical review at all, this is a real world use review. I have no means or know how to test the lenses technical aspects. Also there are many sites that already have the technical aspects of the lens tested.
I got the sigma a little while ago, but the other day was the first time I really got to use it other than some birding in my backyard.
Ok so let's get into it. As we all know the sigma 150-500mm is a wide range zoom super telephoto lens. It's price range puts it anywhere from $800-$900 in the used price range. and $1000-$1100 new. it is also a F5-6.3 variable aperture. Now, there isn't really much else that is a direct competitor as far as price goes, other than the tamron 200-500mm, which I have no experience with. Most other super telephoto primes that surpass 300mm are well over $3000. There also is the Nikon 80-400 vr, but it's also in the $1800 price range. I have also owned the Nikon 70-300 vr, which I never felt was enough reach for my liking, I was always using it maxed out at 300mm and it was quite soft there. I would also like to say I was never very happy with the results using a sigma 70-200 and a 1.4x teleconverter.
So what you really came here for, a real world review for people thinking about using the sigma 150-500mm on a crop sensor camera like the d7000. Ok so that's what I have, a d7000, and that's what I shot with the lens on. Ok well like all super telephotos, a little learning curve is needed if you're going directly from shorter focal lengths. Using this lens at the 400-500mm range is going to require a bit higher shutter speed then the normal 1/60 sec, and or a very steady hand. I found body positioning and correct holding of the large lens to be pretty important when shooting hand held. the lens does have OS, and a switch for OS 1 or OS 2. not sure the difference, I would guess OS 2 is just more stability? I usually will find a spot to lean, or crouch, or even rest the lens against an object if possible. In reality this has nothing to do with this Sigma lens really, any super telephoto lens is going to require this same need for you to be as still as possible when your shooting to get a nice sharp photo at high focal lengths.
Now let's look back at the price of the sigma around $1000, for this price, I'm guessing this lens if marketed towards the casual wildlife photographer. In reality I think that is exactly what this lens is good for. The biggest drawback to this lens is focusing, as with many third party lenses. I feel this lens actually does focus better then the sigma 70-200 F2.8 HSM II. I owned the 70-200 HSM II, and it was constantly having focusing problems, mostly back focusing. This lens, the 150-500mm is much better, while it still isn't a Nikon 70-200 VR II (which will lock focus 95+% of the time on moving objects) it does good for the price. with proper technique I find the Sigma will focus correctly about 50+% of the time, over a wide range of real world examples (sometimes probably due to my own sloppy technique). This is one reason why I would say it's a great lens for a casual wildlife photographer, someone who isn't making a living off using this lens. I would hope if you where making a living using a super telephoto you would have the money to invest in a high dollar prime lens anyways. Like I said, I compared its performance as far as auto focusing goes, to my Nikon 70-200 vr II, cause I would only speculate the Nikon super telephoto primes would perform just as good, if not better in focusing. As far as the focusing comparison goes the Sigma just is not as reliable in the auto focus department. If I was only able to get one or two chances at taking a photo due to time or an animal that was hard to capture, I would be scared to risk it on the Sigma.
On the other hand when the sigma focuses correctly and you are still enough, and you have it stopped up to F8-F10 in the 350-450mm range, its rivals the big dogs. I have photos I am just astonished came from a $1000 3rd party lens. I basically just find myself shooting more and sometimes using continuous shooting mode and fire off 3 or 4 shots when I'm limited in time on a subject. I will post some sample pictures with the settings used at the end of this review. I find the sigma to render colors very accurate to life. Contrast is also good, nothing to complain about there. Sharpness is not as sharp as the Nikon F2.8 series zoom lens, but what really do you expect. Of course most of the time you're not looking at pictures are 100%, so the sigma when used correctly should render pictures that are sharp enough. The reach to 500mm really keeps you from cropping down too much and coming to the point where you actually see how sharp a lens is. The Nikon 70-200 Vr II, is a lens you can almost crop to 100% and get decent pictures after a little bit of editing. obviously nothing you would show anyone or even try to pass off as a good picture.
Build quality? why yes it's not bad, not bad at all. When I first picked up the lens, before using it or even knowing how it would perform, I must say I was quite skeptical. The lens is pretty light. The lens is right on par with the weight of my Nikon 70-200 vr II, the sigma weight is 67 ounces, and I believe the Nikon 70-200 is right around 60 ounces. So like I said at first I thought, hmm light weight lens might not be great optically, or may just be a cheap build. But when I actually spent some time using the lens its build is great for the price point. Zoom and focusing rings are smooth and accurate, they have little to no play in them and you cannot rock them front to back at all. With the lens at normal shooting level there is no problem at all with zoom creep. With the lens totally vertical up or down the front barrel will extend or retract, but you cannot fault it for that, it's got a big heavy front element, and if you made the zoom ring stickier it would be too hard to zoom. Of course it has a 150mm zoom lock, which I found to be very useful when the lens was on my speed carry strap, and not in use, to keep the barrel from extending. The tripod collar is also a great design. It turns with ease and smoothness when loose, and is totally removable is you need. The plastic seems to be of good quality and should take a decent banging around, you know it's going to happen, the lens is huge. My last outing my wife was getting hit with the lens a bit as we walked, so she switched sides, LOL, but I didn't hit it on any doorways, but It's not hard to do if you're not thinking about it. Really no telling if you dropped this lens would it still work? Not sure. My only real grips with the build quality is the finish. I bought my lens used, but in good shape, but there are parts of the lens that is missing the texture slightly rubber feeling finish. Good thing is under that finish is just a satin black plastic, so it's not bad. I think there are spots on the lens that I could probably scrap the finish off with my finger nail if I tried. Also I'm not a fan of sigma lens hoods, this one isn't great either. my sigma 70-200 lens hood would be tough to remove sometimes, this 150-500mm is the same way. But all and all it passes.
So the moral is if you have $1000 to spend, need a super telephoto zoom for causal wildlife photography, or want to test the waters in wildlife / birding. this can be a great lens. when used properly stopped up 2-3 stops above min. aperture, this lens can produce excellent results. min aperture is pretty hit and miss, sure I got a few decent photos with this lens maxed out, but they are few and far between. I also wouldn't worry too much about F8-F9 on this lens, and getting too much DOF, your background is still going to be very soft when using 350-450mm focal lengths. If anything F8-F10 is great because you keep from losing your subjects body, with too little DOF. While F4 or even F2.8 on the high dollar Primes would give a very dramatic DOF and creamy back ground OOF wide open, I figure at high focal lengths a moving target could be out of focus quickly depending on how fast its moving due to such a shallow DOF.
I got the sigma a little while ago, but the other day was the first time I really got to use it other than some birding in my backyard.
Ok so let's get into it. As we all know the sigma 150-500mm is a wide range zoom super telephoto lens. It's price range puts it anywhere from $800-$900 in the used price range. and $1000-$1100 new. it is also a F5-6.3 variable aperture. Now, there isn't really much else that is a direct competitor as far as price goes, other than the tamron 200-500mm, which I have no experience with. Most other super telephoto primes that surpass 300mm are well over $3000. There also is the Nikon 80-400 vr, but it's also in the $1800 price range. I have also owned the Nikon 70-300 vr, which I never felt was enough reach for my liking, I was always using it maxed out at 300mm and it was quite soft there. I would also like to say I was never very happy with the results using a sigma 70-200 and a 1.4x teleconverter.
So what you really came here for, a real world review for people thinking about using the sigma 150-500mm on a crop sensor camera like the d7000. Ok so that's what I have, a d7000, and that's what I shot with the lens on. Ok well like all super telephotos, a little learning curve is needed if you're going directly from shorter focal lengths. Using this lens at the 400-500mm range is going to require a bit higher shutter speed then the normal 1/60 sec, and or a very steady hand. I found body positioning and correct holding of the large lens to be pretty important when shooting hand held. the lens does have OS, and a switch for OS 1 or OS 2. not sure the difference, I would guess OS 2 is just more stability? I usually will find a spot to lean, or crouch, or even rest the lens against an object if possible. In reality this has nothing to do with this Sigma lens really, any super telephoto lens is going to require this same need for you to be as still as possible when your shooting to get a nice sharp photo at high focal lengths.
Now let's look back at the price of the sigma around $1000, for this price, I'm guessing this lens if marketed towards the casual wildlife photographer. In reality I think that is exactly what this lens is good for. The biggest drawback to this lens is focusing, as with many third party lenses. I feel this lens actually does focus better then the sigma 70-200 F2.8 HSM II. I owned the 70-200 HSM II, and it was constantly having focusing problems, mostly back focusing. This lens, the 150-500mm is much better, while it still isn't a Nikon 70-200 VR II (which will lock focus 95+% of the time on moving objects) it does good for the price. with proper technique I find the Sigma will focus correctly about 50+% of the time, over a wide range of real world examples (sometimes probably due to my own sloppy technique). This is one reason why I would say it's a great lens for a casual wildlife photographer, someone who isn't making a living off using this lens. I would hope if you where making a living using a super telephoto you would have the money to invest in a high dollar prime lens anyways. Like I said, I compared its performance as far as auto focusing goes, to my Nikon 70-200 vr II, cause I would only speculate the Nikon super telephoto primes would perform just as good, if not better in focusing. As far as the focusing comparison goes the Sigma just is not as reliable in the auto focus department. If I was only able to get one or two chances at taking a photo due to time or an animal that was hard to capture, I would be scared to risk it on the Sigma.
On the other hand when the sigma focuses correctly and you are still enough, and you have it stopped up to F8-F10 in the 350-450mm range, its rivals the big dogs. I have photos I am just astonished came from a $1000 3rd party lens. I basically just find myself shooting more and sometimes using continuous shooting mode and fire off 3 or 4 shots when I'm limited in time on a subject. I will post some sample pictures with the settings used at the end of this review. I find the sigma to render colors very accurate to life. Contrast is also good, nothing to complain about there. Sharpness is not as sharp as the Nikon F2.8 series zoom lens, but what really do you expect. Of course most of the time you're not looking at pictures are 100%, so the sigma when used correctly should render pictures that are sharp enough. The reach to 500mm really keeps you from cropping down too much and coming to the point where you actually see how sharp a lens is. The Nikon 70-200 Vr II, is a lens you can almost crop to 100% and get decent pictures after a little bit of editing. obviously nothing you would show anyone or even try to pass off as a good picture.
Build quality? why yes it's not bad, not bad at all. When I first picked up the lens, before using it or even knowing how it would perform, I must say I was quite skeptical. The lens is pretty light. The lens is right on par with the weight of my Nikon 70-200 vr II, the sigma weight is 67 ounces, and I believe the Nikon 70-200 is right around 60 ounces. So like I said at first I thought, hmm light weight lens might not be great optically, or may just be a cheap build. But when I actually spent some time using the lens its build is great for the price point. Zoom and focusing rings are smooth and accurate, they have little to no play in them and you cannot rock them front to back at all. With the lens at normal shooting level there is no problem at all with zoom creep. With the lens totally vertical up or down the front barrel will extend or retract, but you cannot fault it for that, it's got a big heavy front element, and if you made the zoom ring stickier it would be too hard to zoom. Of course it has a 150mm zoom lock, which I found to be very useful when the lens was on my speed carry strap, and not in use, to keep the barrel from extending. The tripod collar is also a great design. It turns with ease and smoothness when loose, and is totally removable is you need. The plastic seems to be of good quality and should take a decent banging around, you know it's going to happen, the lens is huge. My last outing my wife was getting hit with the lens a bit as we walked, so she switched sides, LOL, but I didn't hit it on any doorways, but It's not hard to do if you're not thinking about it. Really no telling if you dropped this lens would it still work? Not sure. My only real grips with the build quality is the finish. I bought my lens used, but in good shape, but there are parts of the lens that is missing the texture slightly rubber feeling finish. Good thing is under that finish is just a satin black plastic, so it's not bad. I think there are spots on the lens that I could probably scrap the finish off with my finger nail if I tried. Also I'm not a fan of sigma lens hoods, this one isn't great either. my sigma 70-200 lens hood would be tough to remove sometimes, this 150-500mm is the same way. But all and all it passes.
So the moral is if you have $1000 to spend, need a super telephoto zoom for causal wildlife photography, or want to test the waters in wildlife / birding. this can be a great lens. when used properly stopped up 2-3 stops above min. aperture, this lens can produce excellent results. min aperture is pretty hit and miss, sure I got a few decent photos with this lens maxed out, but they are few and far between. I also wouldn't worry too much about F8-F9 on this lens, and getting too much DOF, your background is still going to be very soft when using 350-450mm focal lengths. If anything F8-F10 is great because you keep from losing your subjects body, with too little DOF. While F4 or even F2.8 on the high dollar Primes would give a very dramatic DOF and creamy back ground OOF wide open, I figure at high focal lengths a moving target could be out of focus quickly depending on how fast its moving due to such a shallow DOF.
Last edited:
