Sigma 50-500 vs Sigma 150-500 vs Tamron 200-500

[assadmd]

i also thought the 150-500 was better....

[Alvin]

I have:
Sigma 80-400 EX OS (note: EX glass but no HSM)
Sigma 150-500 OS HSM (note: not EX glass)

I had the older Sigma 170-500: it was ok but not really good!

I enjoy the 80-400 even without the high speed motors, its IQ is great.
I'm a bit dissapointed with the 150-500 so far - I think the EX glass makes a big difference - but then I wanted the OS function.

At 500mm all these are very slow at f6.3 though - this I find a big downside, and the OS still does not make up for it in low light.

I now have a Sigma 300mm f2.8 and Canon 600mm f4 and Canon 1.4 and 2.0 extenders and not using the zooms much. I'll always hold on to my Sigma 80-400 EX OS, but the Sigma 150-500 HSM OS I will most likely not use again. For a decent price I'll sell it - or just keep it and my kids will use it. Let me know if you interested?

[jaykay]

Sigma has just announced the 50-500 with OS at PMA. http://www.dpreview.com/news/1002/10...a50mm500mm.asp

This confirms my contention that the 150-500 was a replacement for the sub-par 170-500. The real BigmOS should be interesting. Of concern is that it is not an EX lens despite having 4 SLD elements.

BTW, there is a stabalised 70-200 f/2.8 as well.

[Alvin]

Sigma has just announced the 50-500 with OS at PMA. http://www.dpreview.com/news/1002/10...a50mm500mm.asp

This confirms my contention that the 150-500 was a replacement for the sub-par 170-500. The real BigmOS should be interesting. Of concern is that it is not an EX lens despite having 4 SLD elements.

BTW, there is a stabalised 70-200 f/2.8 as well.

That would be a nice one 50-500 with OS (but why they dropping the EX glass!!!

[jaykay]

That would be a nice one 50-500 with OS (but why they dropping the EX glass!!!

I asked the same question on DP Review and was told that EX will in future only be applied to fixed aperture lenses such as the new 70-200 f/2.8 OS.

However the Sigma website says:

The Excellent features of these Sigma lenses such as new optical and mechanical design concept, superior performance, perfect handling, ultra compact design, durability etc., are symbolized by the EX mark. These professional type lenses are distinguished by their the distinctive EX finish and EX logo on the lens barrel.

[brogan]

Do yourself a favour, dont buy 3rd part lenses. buy canon or nikon (dependant on what you running). get yourself a canon 400 f5.6 and crop the images if you have you. you will end up with a better picture than the other lenses. or even a 300 f4 with a 1.4 TC...only time you touch a 3rd part is when you look at the 50-150 mm sigma. (only 3rd party lens I would buy)

[bomtek]

Do yourself a favour, dont buy 3rd part lenses. buy canon or nikon (dependant on what you running). get yourself a canon 400 f5.6 and crop the images if you have you. you will end up with a better picture than the other lenses. or even a 300 f4 with a 1.4 TC...only time you touch a 3rd part is when you look at the 50-150 mm sigma. (only 3rd party lens I would buy)

What about the Sigma 120-300?

[jaykay]

Over the years I have tried not to be a brand snob. For example, some Voigtlander lenses are as good as the Leica equivalent at a fraction of the price. But overall, the Leica lenses just have something special which made me cough up.

I cannot speak for Canon, but have found that although I have bought quite a few Sigma and Tamron lenses over the years, I have sold them all and currently only have Nikkors. My wife uses the 50-500 OS though and is happy with it despite some initial reliability issues. IMHO it is better than the Nikon 80-400 and Nikon has no other alternative zoom. The 70-200 with 2x converter is OK, but not stellar. And it costs almost twice as much as the Bigmost.

Of the Sigmas I have used, the 70-200, 10-20 and 50-500 have been fine. Generally their EX lenses are quite good.

[BigAl]

Do yourself a favour, dont buy 3rd part lenses. buy canon or nikon (dependant on what you running). get yourself a canon 400 f5.6 and crop the images if you have you. you will end up with a better picture than the other lenses. or even a 300 f4 with a 1.4 TC...only time you touch a 3rd part is when you look at the 50-150 mm sigma. (only 3rd party lens I would buy)

Pearls of wisdom like this is one of the reasons why I now avoid ODP...

[bomtek]

Pearls of wisdom like this is one of the reasons why I now avoid ODP...

Its just an opinion, like your signature line!
Not worth sweating the small things - and welcome back to ODP

[walterpike]

Pearls of wisdom like this is one of the reasons why I now avoid ODP...

Too true! A marketers dream, irrational loyalty.

[JJ Steenkamp]

Hi,how will the sigmas compare to the 100-400 canon. applications will be amateur wildlife photography. There is quite a difference in prices aswell! thanks!

[Thndr_strck]

Only reason I didn't buy the 100-400 is I strongly detest the push-pull operation of the lens ! Does any other modern lens operate this way ?
If it is the first zoom lens that you have ever used, then you wouldn't have a problem, but if you have used normal twist zooms, then it gets tricky imho.
There a LOADS of comparative tests between the 100-400 canon and 50-500 OS Sigma

[brogan]

hey guys/girls,

I read on another forum (think it was fred miranda) that the the Sigma 150-500 actually jooms to only 460ish. has anyone heard of this? I tried out the Tamron at The digital Experiance last week, (using their 7D) and the pictures looked rather good. I did not expect much as it is a oldish lens that has not been updated for a while. yes the focus is very slow, and quite loud (I own a 300 F4 and thats considered loud) but liveable. i prefer hearing the lens focus. I would go for the Tamron over any Sigma, as I have had really bad experiances with them, but really good experiances with Tamron (I own the 90m F2.8 macro) one k@k thing about these sort of lenses are that they extend. Im a prime boy, I like my fixed barrels (says the guy looking for a 100-300 L )

[brogan]

Hi,how will the sigmas compare to the 100-400 canon. applications will be amateur wildlife photography. There is quite a difference in prices aswell! thanks!

Steenkamp- 100-400 vs Sigma= no comparison Canon will win that all year round. my father owns the 100-400...it is exciting good considering its focal lengths. I own a 300 F4 IS USM, and it just beats my father 100-400mm. no comparison for the 200 F2.8 though I will never part this that lens!!!

[brogan]

Bomtek- i have bad experiences with sigma, and will not go back to them. you wont agree with me, but everyone to their own...there is a reason for why people always say you pay for what you get...yes Canon and Nikon lenses are more expensive, but with good reason-they are better.

[Henk Coetzee]

I did not expect much as it is a oldish lens that has not been updated for a while.

The laws of optics haven't changed in a while. Some of my favourite lenses are 30-odd years old.

I would go for the Tamron over any Sigma, as I have had really bad experiances with them, but really good experiances with Tamron (I own the 90m F2.8 macro)

These comparisons are meaningless. One of my most used lenses 10-20 is a Sigma while I have a Tamron 70-300 which is about my poorest performer.

[walterpike]

These blanket comments on lens brands are more a comment on branding than on performance. Comments on individual lenses I can accept, because some are better than others, feeding back succesful marketing is not worth much.

[Miss Anna]

Wow!!! I have just read this thread from the beginning up to now. I am now more confused than ever. I can now get a sigma 150-500 or a 50-500 and after reading this still do not know what to choose!! I have a Canon 350 body. I dont want to start this fight over, but one answer is good for 50-500 and the other one found if bad. Ag no man, I am so in the middle of all this and the only thing I want to do is make right decision.

[TheronFamily]

Miss Anna, whichever one you choose, the 150-500 or the 50-500, make sure they have OS !!!! Optical Stabiliser.
These are the NEW incarnations of the old 50-500 and 170-500, and are vastly improved in their image quality and handling.
Budget may dictate the cheaper 150-500mm OS, but the more expensive 50-500mm OS generally gives you minor feature upgrades, most significant probably being the ability to zoom out to 50mm vs 150mm, and the closer focusing distance for the 50-500mm.