Sigma 150-500 f4.5-6.3 apo dg os hsm

[pjs2]

Has anyone seen played with or used this lens. I have seen it in one site only . Sigma site dosen't even mention it. They do stock a 50-500 f4.5 but not a 150-500 4.5 I'm thinking it may have been a typeo on that site.

[I @ M]

This one has been around for a little while now - http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/150-5...g-os-hsm-sigma - and there are a couple of members that come to mind as owning one.

I think that you might be right about the aperture number being a typo on one site.

[Speedway]

Sigma make both the 50-500 f4.5-6.3 and the 150-500 f5-6.3 the 50-500 (Bigma) has been around for many years the 150-500 OS (optical stabelized) is fairly new and the newest is the 50-500 f4.5-6.3 OS. I got the 150-500 OS in Feb 2010 and am very happy with it, I use it for birding and motorsport. A very worthwhile lens for the price.
Keith.

[peterb666]

It is a f/5-6.3 maximum aperture. The baby brother of the 150-500, the 120-400, starts at f/4.5.

I have had my 150-500 f/5-6.3 for 9 months now and it is fabulous value for money. I use it most for surf photography and shooting the moon. The occassional bird shot too but I don't have enough patience for those things.

[peterb666]

I think the 150-500mm does all right...


Maroubra 01 by peterb666, on Flickr


Maroubra 06 by peterb666, on Flickr


Maroubra 05 by peterb666, on Flickr

[pjs2]

Thanks for the feed back and the photo samples(petertriplesix) folks. I thought after having trouble finding it that it was a typo. I think that this will be my next lens, only hearing good things aboot it. Even if I have to invest in a teleconverter as well it will still be much much cheaper than a canon. Now I just have to find someone to buy one off.

[davearnold]

I have had it since December last year, it does take a bit of getting used to get the best out of it.


It is a bit of a "bright sunny" day only lens for me, for birds I shoot at around 1/1000, F8 and ISO no greater then 400 for best results and really needs some form of support, at least a fence post or similar, prefably a monopod, and better yet a Tripod.


Below is a shot I took on the weekend.

[I @ M]

Even if I have to invest in a teleconverter as well

I would strongly recommend that you don't buy a teleconverter to use with that lens.

Teleconverters are best used on lenses that have maximum apertures of F/2.8 or F/4 and if you read the chart here -- http://www.sigmaphoto.com/sigma-lens...tability-chart -- it will show you a few things that highlight the reasons why not to.
Very small maximum aperture and lack of autofocus with that lens.

[ving]

like andrew said... do not use a teleconverter with this lens. you wont wreck the lens but you will not like the photos produced.

[kiwi]

if you need a TC at 500mm you are way too far away anyhow....."get closer and save $" is my motto

[peterb666]

Unless you have excessive amounts of money to buy something like a f/2.8 400mm prime, steer clear of teleconverters. If you have that sort of money, just go out and buy a 800mm prime.

Agee with Kiwi, use sneaker zoom - very effective in extending the focal lenght without compromising quality.

[pjs2]

Thanks folks. Scratching TC off the list. Will be mainly using this lens for footy photo's but if I can get shots like davearnolds and peterb666's I'll be a happy camper. Do any of you have a reservations whatsoever about buying this lens. Did you after buying this one wished you had bought a different one. And if so what was the other lens you where pondering.

[arthurking83]

Slightly slow focusing, but not an issue that's life threatening I say!

Just be aware that this is a slow lens. slow lenses focus more slowly.

Note that when a reference is made to focusing is slow, it's not really that slow.. especially not like the old days such as the old Sigma 70-300 f/4- f/5.6 Macro lenses of old.. they were slow .. zzzzzzzzzzz.... zzzzzzzzzz.... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz-zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz-zzzzzzzz....etc.
It basically never ended back in those days.

Low light will exacerbate this issue with indecisive focus too.

Is this something to worry about? Nope! unless you want to spend up a lot more on much higher end gear.
It's been many years since I've played with a Canon 100-400mm(on a 350 or 400D, I think?) and I reckon they feel about the same(ish).. but we are talking about a long time ago with the Canon gear, and the Sigma lens was played with on my D300, which focuses quite well.

Anyhow I reckon it's worth the money too.

[kiwi]

It's not a lens I would buy for football, better off with a 70-200 with 1.4tc

Too slow re aperture

[Speedway]

I use mine regularly for football and find it good.
Keith.

[JM Tran]

another often overlooked alternative but harder to find, is the well respected Sigma 100-300 F4, myself and many others regard it as one of Sigma's finest tele zooms for its sharpness and bokeh. With a 1.7x tele it will make it a constant F5.6 and at 170-510mm, a decent constant aperture from all focal lengths but will lack the OS.

its not the best solution but it gives you another choice. Hopefully Sigma will release an updated version of it some time in the near future with OS included, as it has been with a number of their lenses.

[kiwi]

keith, that shots very very soft, not a good example of the lens i hope

[camerasnoop]

I have used the Sigma 50-500 f4.5 - 6.3 EX HSM for sports work, and whilst it is possible to get some good shots, it is not always easy. On a Canon xxD body, the focus can be hit-or-miss. This may have improved with the later versions of this lens. On a 1-series, this improves, but it is still not up to even my Canon EF28-300 f3.5-5.6L. There's very little difference in speed between those two lenses. I've even found the focus to be more inaccurate on the Sigma 120-300 F2.8 than on the Canon 28-300, but that's another story.

I haven't used the 150-500 or the older 170-500 Sigmas. Really though, you might be better off trying the Canon 100-400 f4-5.6L unless you absolutely must have the 500mm end. It will still struggle a bit in low light at the long end, but I'm betting it will out-perform the Sigma at 400mm.

[geoffsta]

Personally it depends on the camera body you are going to put it on.
If you put this lens on an entry level DSLR, you are never going to get a sharp image. (Too slow) Mid range camera body is not too bad.
On a full frame camera, and the right person behind it, it will be just as good as any big expensive lens.
Forget the TC with it.

[kiwi]

With respect Geoff, there is no way it will be as sharp as say my Nikon 400 prime. My 120-300 wasn't close wide open at 300