Dear Artie, please stop stuffing up my Long Lens Lust List ......

[Cage]

@ AK

Arthur, Mate, I wish you'd stop mucking up my 'Long Lens Lust List'.

It originally only had the Tamron 150-600mm on it, well reviewed, and fairly well suited to my requirements, plus I had their 24-70mm f2.8 and the 70-200mm f2.8, both highly appreciated, and at about 1/2 the price, and offering around 95% of the IQ of the OEM offerings, to my mind, real bargains.

Then Nikon came up with their 200-500mm, and I added it to my list, with a leaning toward the Nikon, till Mongo's tell-all on his copy. Nikon really do need to smarten themselves up, with their recent history of technical problems with newly released high-end gear a real worry.

And now you Artie, yes you, you purveyor of all things wonderful with Sigma, and it's ground breaking technology with their puck/dock, have caused me to add another lens to my list. And I should add at this point that I'm not anti-Sigma, as possibly the sharpest lens I own is the Sigma 150mm f2.8 Macro, the pre OS version. Scary Sharp !

So now you have forced me to add the Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sport, plus Dock, to the list, noticing that with each addition the price goes up dis-proportionally. Thank you, I hope.

Now I know that you should not expect 'cut your finger' sharp images at 600mm or longer, particularly in Oz with it's heat and shimmer, but this dock sounds like a damn good tool, particularly with it's ability to micro adjust your lens focus and do firmware updates.

I guess until I actually have 'the cash to splash' the 'Long Lens Lust List' is somewhat hypothetical, but geez Mate, please don't throw any more spanners into my wheel of wondering.

[ameerat42]

Go for it, Kev. The 150-600, I mean. And use it at 600.
FWIW, my (now humble) 50-500 is digit-dicingly sharp at 500, and shows some CA at 50 (However, not much and depending on subject.)
(Cripes! I thought I was being bold with my bucks when I got that lens, but now!!)

[arthurking83]

LOL, as you know Kev .. I'm only here to help!
(ahhhh .. it may seem that I'm helping Sigma, or Tamron .. or one of the dealers you may deal with, but in the end I 'spose I'm actually helping the economy in some small way .. keeping the $'s going round and round .. etc )

ps. don't forget the Sigma 150-600 C lens too tho.
I think the major difference is that the S has weather sealing as the 'feature to have' .. optically I doubt there's much between them tho.
C is smaller too .. 95mm front filter rather than 105mm filter(try getting a CPL for that! ). C is also a fair bit lighter too.

Price difference is mad tho. 1/2 price is the C version .. at about low $1K mark rather than the S's $2.2K mark for locally sourced items.

ps. you know it'll never happen tho! ... me ... to stop posting ... those long arduous replies, that lead to highly contagious GAS!


Like the man said in the movies .... tell'im, he's dreaming
(now .. about those jousting sticks I have for sale! )

[I @ M]

but geez Mate, please don't throw any more spanners into my wheel of wondering.

Am I allowed to chuck a wrench?

If so, would you prefer metric, imperial or whitworth?

[Dazz1]

Look at me, recommending what I just bought

I tried the sport version in the shop, but purchased the C version of the Sigma 150-600mm. Do not discount the weight aspect. The C version is a LOT lighter to hold.

[Cage]

Am I allowed to chuck a wrench?

If so, would you prefer metric, imperial or whitworth?

Andrew, I would have thought that you would be more likely to have wench at hand than a wrench.

- - - Updated - - -

Look at me, recommending what I just bought

I tried the sport version in the shop, but purchased the C version of the Sigma 150-600mm. Do not discount the weight aspect. The C version is a LOT lighter to hold.

Cheers Wets

I do very little shooting hand-held so the weight isn't a factor for me to worry about.

[Lance B]

Cage, the 200-500 f5.6 is a gem of a lens and you won't be disappointed by it. Yes, there was a teething issue but it has all been resolved. However, there are a multitude of excellent long lenses to be had these days, all with excellent IQ, much better than anything we've had on offer previously, and all at very, very reasonable prices. The Sigma 150-600 Sports and Contemporary and the Tamron 150-600 as well as the new Nikon 200-500. I was almost going to buy the Sigma 150-600 Sports but ended up buying the Nikon 200-500 as it was just that much lighter, smaller and cheaper simply because I wanted it as a travel lens for birds and wildlife. The Sigma 150-600 Sports is a fair lump of a lens at almost 3kg and a bit larger as well. From the results I have seen from any of these lenses, I know you will not be disappointed. Brad Hill has a good discussion on them here:
http://www.naturalart.ca/voice/blog.html

I have a lot of time for Brad Hill as his conclusions on many of the lenses he has used correspond with my thoughts as well.

[Cage]

@ AK

Artie, your comeback was, as usual, insightful.

There are a couple of differences, other than the price, between the Sigma 'C' and 'S' that I find rather compelling.

I figure that the extra 2lbs of the 'S' over the 'C' hasn't gone into heavier plastic, rather into components that will give more longevity and the weather sealing adds to this philosophy.

The build of the 'S' lens seems to point it toward the pro/semi-pro market, a segment where it has no direct competition from either Canon or Nikon.

As for the price difference, if you amortise the difference over about five years, the period I'd expect the 'S' version to not only last, but still be delivering the goods, it isn't a deal breaker.

On the upside, while I'm saving up the extra readies, one of the big boys might wake up to the fact that there is a big market
for a 500/600mm f5/6.3 prime, the long end being the reason that most of us want their big zooms for.

- - - Updated - - -

@ Lance

Succinctly put Mate.

I totally agree that you would have to do some pixel peeping to find any greatly discernible difference between the four contenders.

I'm just more than a little peeved with Nikon over their seeming lack of interest in QC, having been there with my D600.

I'll probably change my mind several times before I get the funds together.

- - - Updated - - -

@Am

Decisions, decisions ! When you are on a very limited budget, you have to do your best to ensure you make the right one.

[Mark L]

Decisions, decisions ! When you are on a very limited budget, you have to do your best to ensure you make the right one.

The bank manager says my limited budget means I'm staying with the lens I have already.
So,
1- I'm staying with the lens I have already and will strive to take the best photos I can with it.
2- for others that read this thread that a stuck with what they have, don't worry about needing the best most up to date gear. You can still take wonderful photos.
and 3- once you get new gear are you willing to give you old gear away Kev? (please think of me )

[J.davis]

I bought the sigma C and if it lasts five years, something new will be on the horizon, if I bought the S lens, in five years time when I want something newer, the lens will be too good to chuck in the drawer.
Plus at half the price, I won't have nightmares about funds.

[Cage]

The bank manager says my limited budget means I'm staying with the lens I have already.
So,
1- I'm staying with the lens I have already and will strive to take the best photos I can with it.
2- for others that read this thread that a stuck with what they have, don't worry about needing the best most up to date gear. You can still take wonderful photos.
and 3- once you get new gear are you willing to give you old gear away Kev? (please think of me )

Mark, this is not about having the latest and greatest. The longest lens I have is 300mm and as I progress with my astro photography it just wont have enough reach to do what I want. Staying with what I already have would be like you doing your bird shots with the 28-105mm. It just wouldn't do the job to your satisfaction.

If I could have whatever I wanted, I'd be looking at the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4G ED VR Lens, on my doorstep for a tad under $15K. Yeah, in ya' dreams Kev.

To make this happen sooner rather than later, I've made the decision to part with my beloved 1200cc Suzuki Bandit which I bought new in 1997. I felt a pang of regret as I typed that, as I've ridden it around most of this big red paddock we live in, and it never let me down, not once. I just hope I can find someone who will appreciate it as much as I have.

And Mark, sorry Mate, I can't see me parting with any of my gear, anytime soon. It was all well researched before buying and all bought for a specific purpose.

Cheers

Kev

- - - Updated - - -

I bought the sigma C and if it lasts five years, something new will be on the horizon, if I bought the S lens, in five years time when I want something newer, the lens will be too good to chuck in the drawer.
Plus at half the price, I won't have nightmares about funds.

I agree with your comments John, however as my main use will be astro photography, trying to capture tiny pin pricks of light from millions of light years away demands that you try for the best affordable gear possible. As I said to Mark, the Nikon 600mm is out of the question and going on the reviews I've read, the Sigma Sport just seem to shade the other contenders in terms of sharpness and IQ.

Oh, and it will be a handy birding lens before sunset while I'm waiting for the stars to appear.

[Lance B]

As I said to Mark, the Nikon 600mm is out of the question and going on the reviews I've read, the Sigma Sport just seem to shade the other contenders in terms of sharpness and IQ.

Oh, and it will be a handy birding lens before sunset while I'm waiting for the stars to appear.

Mate, I really don't think you'll be disappointed with that lens. I had a brief play with it in the shop, it really is well built, super smooth zoom function, and from what I have seen the IQ is excellent.

- - - Updated - - -

Just to throw the cat amongst the pigeons, here is another review, this one from Camera Labs - a very good review site - but here they give the gong to the Nikon 200-500 over the Sigma Sports:

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Ni.../verdict.shtml

[Cage]

Just to throw the cat amongst the pigeons, here is another review, this one from Camera Labs - a very good review site - but here they give the gong to the Nikon 200-500 over the Sigma Sports:

Very interesting results for the Nikon with the 1.4 T/C.

[J.davis]

Lance, I would like to see the Sigma test results 'after' being adjusted to the camera with the dock. The pics shown seem soft and I believe ( from experience ), that can be adjusted.

[Lance B]

Lance, I would like to see the Sigma test results 'after' being adjusted to the camera with the dock. The pics shown seem soft and I believe ( from experience ), that can be adjusted.

From what I know of these test sites, they use live view focusing so to take away any AF fine tune issues.