I am considering the purchase of a Sigma 150-500 lens for my Nikon D700. Has anyone had experience with this lens? In the shop it seemed a bit slow focusing in outside daylight. How sharp is this lens?
I've read on this forum about the Tamron 70-300VC lens and it sounds very good. I'm a "sharpness" freak.
Thank you.
To add a word on reliability...
lensrentals.com has been publishing servicing statistics for the last two years or so and have stopped proposing both the sigmas 120-400 & 150-500 due to their very low (abnormal) reliability.
Thanks to you both for your opinions. I took some shots today with the 150-500 and am not very impressed with the sharpness on the long end.
I will take your advice and return the lens and reconsider.
My big wish is for the new Nikon 70-200 2.8 with vr.
However, when shooting, I often wish I had more than 200mm.
[quote name='inhaliburton' timestamp='1291168696' post='4621']
Thanks to you both for your opinions. I took some shots today with the 150-500 and am not very impressed with the sharpness on the long end.
I will take your advice and return the lens and reconsider.
[/quote]
Don't mean to undermine anyone else's comments but it takes quite a bit of practice to master a 500mm lens... especially when it's a f/6.3. I've used this lens and it produced results I expected to see (i.e. good, for this price-class). I find an argument like a 70-200 or a 70-300's sharper is a bit invalid because they're not 500mm lenses. If you want a stabilised 500mm FOV on your viewfinder, you won't get the same bang per. buck with other lenses.
[quote name='inhaliburton' timestamp='1291168696' post='4621']
My big wish is for the new Nikon 70-200 2.8 with vr.
However, when shooting, I often wish I had more than 200mm.
[/quote]
You add a 2x TC which would give you a 140-400mm f/5.6 equivalent combo for the times you need it. Personally, I wouldn't get a lens if I'd need to use the 2x TC a lot with it.
GTW
We used a monopod with the 150-500 + handhold with OIS with at least 1/750.
The AF was just not quick/precise enough for birding. No wonder with 6,3 at the long end.
My theory is, that a sharper lens produce better AF results as well.
Plus IF you finally got a photo (of a sitting bird) the feathers looked mushy compared with my trusted Sigma 400mm APO Makro.
Why they ever stopped producing this lens?
One of the lenses I will never sell. You might find one on fleebay for under 300 Euros. For Nikon you even get HSM.
Regards
That's what I like about this forum and website. You people give out sound advice and ideas based on personal experience. I've got 2 weeks to use this lens, at which time I can keep it or return for full refund. I have not given this lens a fair chance so I will use it and base decision based upon results.
Has anyone seen a "review" of this lens? I can't fine one.
Regards, Paul.
in Wellington, ON Canada
Paul
You will "find" a link for a review in my first post. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
Regards
[quote name='Bjoern' timestamp='1291279618' post='4679']
Paul
You will "find" a link for a review in my first post. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
Regards
[/quote]
Thank you Bjoern, I missed that link. I'm blushing! I have now read the review and appreciate the added information regarding this lens.
If the IQ is good (I like VERY sharp), up to 400mm I may keep. I'll be out shooting tomorrow!
Regards, Paul.
[quote name='inhaliburton' timestamp='1291337951' post='4721']
If the IQ is good (I like VERY sharp), up to 400mm ...
[/quote]
As compared to...?
GTW