Sigma 150-500

[markmullen]

I could fancy a longer lens for Le Mans, I've got 18-55 and 55-250 and am wondering about the Sigma 150-500, it seems cheap at £660, http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/prod952.html

Has anyone used it, is it any good?

[Starfighter]

Heavy with slow OS system compared with the Canon 100-400 and soft at the longer end from what I have seen.

Better that the 50-500.

[stigmundfreud]

mark do you have any better glass you could drop 2 stops for? Something like the 70-200 then stick a 2x convertor making it an f5.6 lens? Think about what you have, what you could do to convert. I've seen poor IQ on the larger cheap glass

[GetCarter]

As with all lenses... they are cheap or expensive for good reasons.

Edited by GetCarter on Sunday 18th April 14:44

[markmullen]

I'm only just getting back properly into photography since my last Nikon 35mm SLR so am still building up my gear, I've got a Canon 450d, 18-55 and a 55-250 F4-5.6

A couple of stops on the 55-250 would take it down to 7.1 which is a bit slow and AIUI the Canon teleconverters will only keep AF if bigger than f5.6?

I'm only playing about for my own enjoyment, will probably never print anything bigger than A4, would the Sigma be OK for that kind of use?

[Furyous]

Theres a good used one just gone up on Talk Photgraphy at £600 if its of any help.

[M-J-B]

markmullen said:

I could fancy a longer lens for Le Mans, I've got 18-55 and 55-250 and am wondering about the Sigma 150-500, it seems cheap at £660, http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/prod952.html

Has anyone used it, is it any good?

Had one and used it about three times.

I took it to Le Mans and the Spanish F1 last year and it never came out of the bag for longer than a few seconds on either occasion. It's too slow, actually a bit too long if you're close to the action and if the light is anything less than good, it's not a good lens. Personally I'd save my pennies and go for a Canon 70-200 2.8 L or a 100-400

I sold my 150-500 some months ago and I don't miss is one bit.......however you may find it's wonderful and after all it's your money

[Dogsey]

Hire something and see how it suits you? Lensesforhire.co.uk have a very good range of Canon fit lenses.

[S47]

If you can manage with using it at F8 it's a real bargain for a 500mm lens. It's a modern design so digital IQ is exceptionally good.
If not you're stuck with the vastly overpriced Canon 500 F4 which IMO is still too slow.
Better off buying the 400 F2.8 if you can afford it

[JustinP1]

I've got the Sigma 50-500 for by Canon 400D.

I really like it and find the range really useful so that when I am walking around you can get good quality shots at both 50mm all the way up to 500mm.

I am quite sure that the Canon 'L' range lenses are faster, autofocus a bit quicker and give that extra 10% of sharpness. But... how much would you end up paying for a 500mm 'L' lens? Or even a 400mm for that matter?

However, for the money I paid for mine on ebay (£400) it absolutely murders the 'standard' Canon lenses I have in terms of speed and IQ like night and day.

[zaphod30]

You would be better off with the Tamron. Although it is cheaper it is a better quality lens and the focusing has the edge over the Sigma's, which is painfully slow.

Mifsuds have a 2nd hand one for sale for £399.

http://www.mifsuds.com/acatalog/Used_Canon_Zoom_Le...

(scroll to bottom of the page)

[4hero]

SPAM ALERT

[zaphod30]

who? me?

[4hero]

zaphod30 said:

who? me?

1st posts that contain a URL tend to be spam.

[zaphod30]

sorry, i've just joined to try to be helpful thats all.



i've been looking into these lenses myself recently for my wife. i use the 500mm f4, but she cant lift it.
so have been looking for a lighter alternative

Edited by zaphod30 on Tuesday 20th April 23:41

[Yellabelly]

What experience have you got of the Sigma 150 - 500 to form your opinion? There are a raft of exceptional photos on the flickr pages for this lens. Like most things it takes a bit of getting used to, which is why I'm surprised at M-J-Bs comment that he hardly took it out of it's case but condems it out of hand. I have one, I'm still getting used to it and have had some reasonable results but most of the problem lies with the bloke behind the camera not the lens. it is unfair to compare a £700 Sigma with the Canon L glass f2.8 exotica that most seem to use as the comparison. There are many Sigma owners who have had the Canon 100 - 400 or 400 primes and consider their performance to be inferior to the Sigma!!!! Horses for courses.

YB

[M-J-B]

Yellabelly said:

What experience have you got of the Sigma 150 - 500 to form your opinion? There are a raft of exceptional photos on the flickr pages for this lens. Like most things it takes a bit of getting used to, which is why I'm surprised at M-J-Bs comment that he hardly took it out of it's case but condems it out of hand. I have one, I'm still getting used to it and have had some reasonable results but most of the problem lies with the bloke behind the camera not the lens. it is unfair to compare a £700 Sigma with the Canon L glass f2.8 exotica that most seem to use as the comparison. There are many Sigma owners who have had the Canon 100 - 400 or 400 primes and consider their performance to be inferior to the Sigma!!!! Horses for courses.

YB

I take on board your comments. Unfortunately from my experience it was heavy, slow, not brilliiant in anything other than good light and as you mention, I also have a 70-200 2.8L so I am spoilt by a better lens (IMO)

It just didn't do it for me, but that's what makes the world an interesting place!

[S47]

I own several 'exotic' Canon primes including 400,500 & 600mm. Compared to them the Sigma really does deliver the goods, but as a I mentioned above you need to stop it down to F8 to achieve excellent results, which the Canon primes can deliver at full aperture.
The same cannot be said for the Crap and ancient Canon 100-400 zoom which is lousy and blurry at all apertures IMO.
So for what you pay for the Sigma ~£700 it a real bargain IMO.

[XB70]

S47 said:

I own several 'exotic' Canon primes including 400,500 & 600mm. Compared to them the Sigma really does deliver the goods, but as a I mentioned above you need to stop it down to F8 to achieve excellent results, which the Canon primes can deliver at full aperture.
The same cannot be said for the Crap and ancient Canon 100-400 zoom which is lousy and blurry at all apertures IMO.
So for what you pay for the Sigma ~£700 it a real bargain IMO.

I will call "horses for courses" and disagree completely there. On my second 100-400L and they are a brilliant lens.

Maybe all the pro and semi-pro guys at RIAT and the other airshows, where you literally see 'waves' of 100-400's panning across the crowd, have all bought lemons.

[4hero]

Likewise, never had an issue with my 100-400. It's a little soft at 400, but can live with that