Sigma 150-600??????

nickt

Senior Member
OK guys, please steer me into a 150-600mm for my d7100. I know there are a number of Tamron owners here. Not as many Sigma owners. Pretty sure [MENTION=39102]10 Gauge[/MENTION] has the Sigma and @Felisek too, I can't remember who else. I spent half the night reading posts here last night, but I'm looking for some current opinions. How do you feel about your lens today? Do you still love it? Things sometimes go downhill quickly like @mikew 's Tamron. Tamron has a $70 rebate right now and a 2 yr longer warranty. Not enough to win me over if the Sigma is better for me.

Most people don't seem to be bothered by the Tamron freeze problem. Some don't even have a problem. But I'm thinking the potential is there to really annoy me if it does happen. I'm a patient guy but not so much for unresponsive electronics. So that worries me and I am leaning toward the Sigma. Also the Sigma has a couple more features that seem useful.

Do I need the USB dock if I get the Sigma? Seems like it would be good to have. Thanks for any help. I might be able to wrap this up this weekend before any guilt sets in!
 

10 Gauge

Senior Member
I really like my Sigma. No issues with it like with my Tamron.

My Siggy was also pretty well calibrated from the factory and really didn't need much adjustment with the dock where my Tamron was insane bad but I think I got a bad copy in that regard.

I started to do a full tune on the Sigma tonight and finding it a lot more difficult and time consuming than my first go of just tuning it at one distance.

Sent from my HTC One M8 using Tapatalk
 

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
I may buy another Tamron but cant in all honesty recommend any one else to,if i buy one its in the full knowledge of how frustrating my experience was,and the knowledge that Tamron say a problem does not exist after having mine back twice for it and it being mentioned even on the flickr group.
The situation is some on here think the sigma is the better lens,i disagree but have to admit i have only looked at results and never used one so the jury is still out as to what i may buy.
 

cbay

Senior Member
Mine has froze maybe a dozen times or less in about 4K shots. I just got it back from the firmware update and used it today and it froze once. Same deal switch it off and back on and fixed. So i wouldn't count on the update taking care of the freeze problem. If it got worse i would be concerned but so far it's not been a serious issue.
 

J-see

Senior Member
I have the Tamron but if I had to buy again and pick Tam or Sig, it would be Sig.

It's not just the freeze but also the inability to fine-tune her at different lengths. There's simply too much difference in mine between both ends.
 
Last edited:

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
Mine has froze maybe a dozen times or less in about 4K shots. I just got it back from the firmware update and used it today and it froze once. Same deal switch it off and back on and fixed. So i wouldn't count on the update taking care of the freeze problem. If it got worse i would be concerned but so far it's not been a serious issue.

Chris,is it worse with one camera than the other,just read about a guy who had no problems with his D7000 but changed to a D7200 and started having problems.
 

Ironwood

Senior Member
My Tamron has froze up only once in about 1200 shots since I bought it.
I am not sure what I would do if I had to buy again, though I don't regret buying the Tamron.
 

J-see

Senior Member
I don't regret getting the Tam. There was little choice when I made the decision. Only the Sig sports was competition and there was no date when she'd be available so the Tamron was the logical choice.

But now there are more options; Sig S, Sig C, Tam, Nikon 200-500mm and even when we don't have info on all and some still need to show performance over duration, I know with certainty that only the Tamron has issues.

That would make the decision much easier these days.

Btw; they could give a 50 year warranty but it is meaningless when they can't/won't fix the issues you have.
 
Last edited:

Felisek

Senior Member
I will start with a caveat. My first impression with the Sigma was that pictures came out quite soft, in particular at 600 mm. Having said that, I have never owned a 600-mm lens before and didn't really know what to expect. My other lenses (look at my signature), except for the Nikon 55-200, are very, very sharp, so I suppose I'm a bit spoiled here and expect terrific quality of every lens. Obviously, I'm not going to get it from a consumer-grade long telephoto. I'd have to pay ten times more (and hire a man to carry the lens for me) to get comparable image quality. This is how it is.

Fine tuning with the dock help a little bit, but it is still a bit soft at the long end (shorter end is much better) . But I learned to live with it! I try taking pictures in a way that I don't have to crop too much. I make sure my shutter speed is fast enough for the subject I'm photographing. I use mostly f/8. And I apply sharpening in post processing. Results? Have a look at this flickr album

https://www.flickr.com/gp/119252778@N08/08795m

(not all pictures in this album are from the Sigma 150-600) These are not controlled lab tests for pixel peeking. These are real-life pictures and I quite like them. I actually like them a lot and like the lens a lot. Yes, it has some limitations, but got me into a completely new type of photography, I've never tried before. I'm happy with it!
 
Last edited:

J-see

Senior Member
What I noticed with longer lenses is that they require constant fine-tuning especially when you shoot them wider.

Plastic, metal and glass all reacts differently to heat so it is no surprise when temperature drops or rises, it affects critical focus. I was getting slightly softer images with my 300mm and by re-tuning her to the heat these days and dialing her back 2 steps, I now have sharp shots again.

For shorter lenses it isn't always a problem since you often have more DoF but for a long lens and shots at higher magnification, having focus one or two stops in the wrong direction makes all the difference.
 
Last edited:

Elliot87

Senior Member
I'm not sure if I'll buy either of the 150-600mm lenses. For me it is just as important that an upgrade for my 70-300mm is sharper as well as longer.
Even at 300mm I can still get close enough to wildlife to fill the frame quite well, my biggest frustration is that even then I still find the images softer than I'd like. I think I'd rather be able to take tack sharp photos at 300mm, than slightly soft ones at 600mm. Really interested to see what the 200-500mm delivers.
 

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
I'm not sure if I'll buy either of the 150-600mm lenses. For me it is just as important that an upgrade for my 70-300mm is sharper as well as longer.
Even at 300mm I can still get close enough to wildlife to fill the frame quite well, my biggest frustration is that even then I still find the images softer than I'd like. I think I'd rather be able to take tack sharp photos at 300mm, than slightly soft ones at 600mm. Really interested to see what the 200-500mm delivers.

I think either 150-600 would give you the sharpness you seek way beyond 300mm even if it didnt at 600, though even on FX i would be quiet happy with the 300+1.4 if only i didnt need VR,i think the DX crop on the D750 is about 10mp so even 50% of that would be 5mp,plenty to work with if needs be and the original file is sharp,i started with a 6mp DX in the form of the D70 and its let down was poor lens at the time and inadequate noise handling.
You will need to think very seriously if you change your mind and dont go with the 300mm and 1.4 as a sharp 420mm on DX is not a bad starting point.
 

Elliot87

Senior Member
I think either 150-600 would give you the sharpness you seek way beyond 300mm even if it didnt at 600, though even on FX i would be quiet happy with the 300+1.4 if only i didnt need VR,i think the DX crop on the D750 is about 10mp so even 50% of that would be 5mp,plenty to work with if needs be and the original file is sharp,i started with a 6mp DX in the form of the D70 and its let down was poor lens at the time and inadequate noise handling.
You will need to think very seriously if you change your mind and dont go with the 300mm and 1.4 as a sharp 420mm on DX is not a bad starting point.

I would certainly hope so. I do have some serious thinking to do but time is on my side. I'm hoping the 200-500mm will be a nice compromise between the sharpness of a prime and the flexibility and VR of the 150-600's. It will hopefully provide good results with a 1.4TC but I'll wait for real world reviews and images to find that out. The only drawbacks I see on paper are extra weight and it will be a more expensive option.
 

J-see

Senior Member
I'm not sure if I'll buy either of the 150-600mm lenses. For me it is just as important that an upgrade for my 70-300mm is sharper as well as longer.
Even at 300mm I can still get close enough to wildlife to fill the frame quite well, my biggest frustration is that even then I still find the images softer than I'd like. I think I'd rather be able to take tack sharp photos at 300mm, than slightly soft ones at 600mm. Really interested to see what the 200-500mm delivers.

A large part of sharpness is a matter of processing. Sure you have lenses that deliver shots sharp as a knife even at 100% magnification but for those lenses that don't perform that well, there is post processing to push them beyond their limits.

When done right, and within limitations, you can make a slightly softer shot look pretty damn good.
 

cbay

Senior Member
Chris,is it worse with one camera than the other,just read about a guy who had no problems with his D7000 but changed to a D7200 and started having problems.
No, it hasn't beeen. The approx. dozen times is between both cameras. More with the 7200 but that's all i've been using it with since i got it.
 

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
No, it hasn't beeen. The approx. dozen times is between both cameras. More with the 7200 but that's all i've been using it with since i got it.

Ime fairly convinced there are no good or bad units and the amount of freeze you get is related to how much you use it,i used mine nearly every day so had loads of problems.
 

J-see

Senior Member
Besides the focus freeze there are also those explainable periods that she just couldn't it right. It only happened two or three times in as long as I got her but it's even worse than freezing.
 

cbay

Senior Member
Thanks everyone. Great to hear your real-life experiences with both lenses. I have a lot to digest.

I would certainly hope so. I do have some serious thinking to do but time is on my side. I'm hoping the 200-500mm will be a nice compromise between the sharpness of a prime and the flexibility and VR of the 150-600's. It will hopefully provide good results with a 1.4TC but I'll wait for real world reviews and images to find that out. The only drawbacks I see on paper are extra weight and it will be a more expensive option.

Nickt, Elliot, this is just a suggestion, but if i were looking at one of these lenses and could find someone that shot similar subjects and conditions who could share some raws that would be a good way to help evaluate the lens. Of course conditions and technique are a part to consider but looking forward i would want to do that if i could. Just a thought. I have some that i shared with Mike a few months ago when he was considering the 7200 and left them on dropbox if you want you can have at them. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/hl7fcip88p535mz/AADtS--KtkazKgZrnFk2Ngx1a?dl=0
 
Top