Sigma 150-500 advice

[RJC1878]

Hi all,

I'm currently in the market for a substantial telephoto lens to mount on my Nikon D3100. Having used the 55-300 and been a little underwhelmed last season, I thought now was the right time to look at getting it replaced. As you can probably tell, I'm a very part-time amateurish photographer. But I do have the money available to spend on a 150-500. Question is, is it worth it? It seems perfect for my price range and what I'm hoping to achieve. Are there better alternatives out there?

Many thanks, your feedback is most appreciated.

[r6pilot]

hiya hans i got my 150-500mm sigma from pro camera shop.com for my d3100 its a great lens this is a couple taken with it hope it helps

[Inthrustwetrust]

Hi Hans,

It's a great lens.

Just beware that Sigma did a world wide recall on them just over 18 months ago to modify the focussing and recalibrate as they were focussing soft. There are a list of serial numbers somewhere on the sigma site to watch out for. miss those and you have a good one out of the box.

The best settings are about 400mm in F8 and it is heavy so takes practice.

My avatar is a picture taken using it as RIAT last year if that helps.

cheers
Dave

[Vodka]

Having had one of these. I always kept the focal length no greater than 400mm, as mentioned above. It really goes very soft thereafter. Also have this in mind on a crop sensor too.

By stopping down to 7.1 on mine was around the sharpest it ever got at the longer ranges. If you've got plenty of light, sun on gas mark 9, then the lens is good. Anything less than good conditions outdoors it will suffer in both clarity and sharpness. It does tend to hunt in the lower light conditions.

Personally, after having one for many years and then paying the extra 30% for the 100-400 Canon IS, the results are chalk and cheese.

On your Nikon I would suggest perhaps consider the Nikon option of the 80-400mm. The sigma is around £800 with the nikon around £1100. But for the extra £300 you'll have a lens that will certainly last and be vastly superior in all aspects. Any camera is only as good as the glass on the end. When you upgrade your camera you will find the sigma may not be getting the best out of your camera and even suggest not getting the best out of even the D3100?

So my suggestion is save abit more money for the nikon option and thus save yourself perhaps the cost of another lens in time to come.

[RJC1878]

Isn't the 80-400mm fairly slow?

[Vodka]

Isn't the 80-400mm fairly slow?

Not as slow as the Sigma.

[Vodka]

But I think the budget may be THE issue ?

[keithnewsome]

I think I may be able to help a little with your choice of the two lens mentioned above, having both in my collection, I know that trying to get that extra 'reach' with a Nikon set up is difficult, without spending a lot of money on prime lens.
The Sigma 150-500 and Nikon 80-400 are both heavy, are both a little slow in the AF department and their VR/IS is just acceptable ! these are just my very amature views .... BUT in good light they can both do a very good job .... here is the problem with both ! they need good light .... in basic terms I think they are two lens which need a serious 'make over' But still do the biz for the price, the 80-400 is so good to leave attached to your body all the time, as a walkaround camera it will surprise you with its versatility !

So a couple of comparison photos, these were both taken using a D700, but I hope the results will help ??

First the Sigma 150-500 (£799.00) photo taken late March, not best light, straight from camera, converted from RAW to JPEG only. notice serious vignetting (dark areas around all corners) almost always there ?? at 400mm 1/1000sec f10.


Second the Nikon 80-400 (£1179.90) photo taken today at about the same distance as the first, light fading ish at 17:30 once again straight from the camera, converted from RAW to JPEG only ... no vignetting ... therefore no need to allow for cropping ? and at 400mm 1/400sec f10.


So as you may have guessed I am coming out slightly in favour of the Nikon product ! but its a little more expensive, build quality is, in my opinion, a little better ! but you, as always, get what you pay for !!

I do have another suggestion for you ! but will await your views so far ! I hope this is of some help to you ??

Keith

[RJC1878]

I think I may be able to help a little with your choice of the two lens mentioned above, having both in my collection, I know that trying to get that extra 'reach' with a Nikon set up is difficult, without spending a lot of money on prime lens.
The Sigma 150-500 and Nikon 80-400 are both heavy, are both a little slow in the AF department and their VR/IS is just acceptable ! these are just my very amature views .... BUT in good light they can both do a very good job .... here is the problem with both ! they need good light .... in basic terms I think they are two lens which need a serious 'make over' But still do the biz for the price, the 80-400 is so good to leave attached to your body all the time, as a walkaround camera it will surprise you with its versatility !

So a couple of comparison photos, these were both taken using a D700, but I hope the results will help ??

First the Sigma 150-500 (£799.00) photo taken late March, not best light, straight from camera, converted from RAW to JPEG only. notice serious vignetting (dark areas around all corners) almost always there ?? at 400mm 1/1000sec f10.


Second the Nikon 80-400 (£1179.90) photo taken today at about the same distance as the first, light fading ish at 17:30 once again straight from the camera, converted from RAW to JPEG only ... no vignetting ... therefore no need to allow for cropping ? and at 400mm 1/400sec f10.


So as you may have guessed I am coming out slightly in favour of the Nikon product ! but its a little more expensive, build quality is, in my opinion, a little better ! but you, as always, get what you pay for !!

I do have another suggestion for you ! but will await your views so far ! I hope this is of some help to you ??

Keith

Wow. Thanks for that, Keith. A really informative and helpful post.

I am leaning slightly towards the 80-400; but budget MAY be the issue. What are the alternatives?

Many thanks.

[BMrider]

Does it have to be a zoom, ?? if you want tack sharp & super fast AF go for a 300mm F4 Af-S, budget £700 2nd hand on ebay, add a Nikon teleconvertor 1.4 (£200 2nd hand) for extra reach, no effect on IQ the quality will be streets ahead of any zoom

[RJC1878]

Thanks to everyone who replied. Your advice is invaluable.

I 'think' I've narrowed it down to the Sigma 120-400 or 150-500 - whilst remaining within budget. Any suggestions as to which one I should be looking to buy? I'm still open to alternatives (be quick!), but would ideally like this sorted by Saturday and can't really afford to prolong the debate any longer - I wish I could. But I'm hoping to use it on Sunday!

Furthermore, Amazon UK seem to be offering the 150-500 at a fairly reasonable price; compared to elsewhere. Is this an appropriate place to be looking to buy a lens? I normally use Jessops for anything camera related.

Thanks.

[Pen Pusher]

I normally use Jessops for anything camera related

You can get a lot of camera equipment a lot cheaper on-line than at Jessops.

Brian

[RJC1878]

Update.

I currently own the Nikon 55-300. Which has been quite disappointing for the photos I am looking to achieve. Therefore, I'm now thinking of upgrading to the 70-300VR and saving a bit of money in the process - not sure I need such an expensive lens, if I'm only using it a handful of times (rules out the Sigma lens?)

Does anyone know much about the Nikon 70-300VR lens? Will there be a significant improvement in both IQ and reach, over the 55-300? Any samples?

Many thanks.

*Apologies if this is all coming a bit long winded. The more information I can get the better!

[Vixen1]

Ive got both the Sigma 150-500mm IS and the Nikon 70-300mm VR.

There is not a great deal of difference in speed of focus as long as there is plenty of light especially for the Sigma. I really like the 70.300mm.

Here's a few to look at:-
70-300VR
Nikon D300 - f8 1/1250th ISO800 220mm


Nikon D300 - f5.3 1/1800th ISO800 300mm


Nikon D300 - f6.3 1/800th ISO400 300mm


150-500IS You'll develop your shoulders with this lens.
Nikon D7000 f20 1/200th ISO 640 450mm


Nikon D7000 f18 1/125th ISO 640 450mm


I hope these help.

[keithnewsome]

Hi it's me again, thank you for you nice responce to my last post on this subject, at the bottom of that post I said I have another option to mention ..... well it has happened .... I wanted to suggest you try the Nikon 70-300VR .... I have owned one for several years and it is the best piece of glass I have ! whether I was lucky enough to get a 'good' one I will never know, but it is simply stunning ! doesn't have a problem with light, always comes up with quality photos ! it's only let down is often me at the other end of the controls ??
As this lens was over £600 when I bought it and it is now around £430 I think it is a snip ...... ????? over to you Hans !

Keith