p.1 #3 · *UPDATED* A Sigma 50-500 150-500 comparison
As you can see above the 50-500 has the edge. I did prints of these crops at 5x7 and you can easily tell the difference at first glance, but I will say that both images would make a fine print hanging on your wall at poster size.
Edited by davekone on Jun 20, 2008 at 05:56 PM GMT
p.1 #5 · *UPDATED* A Sigma 50-500 150-500 comparison
I need more time to shoot with the new lens, and I plan on doing that Saturday. I am a bit miffed at the OS performance, but maybe I am having a good evening hand holding 500mm at 1/125th - 1/400th. I'm not sure how many times I'll need to shoot 500mm below 1/125th, or if OS will save me on a day where I'm not so steady.
I also want to add that the shots with the word Price in it was only 10 feet away, so I must do some tests where the subject is further away..
Great build quality, same as the 50-500. The hood is much improved over the 50-500 in terms of how easy it is to take on and off. The lens cap can be removed easily with the hood on, something that is nearly impossible with the 50-500.
p.1 #9 · *UPDATED* A Sigma 50-500 150-500 comparison
So far I haven't been all that impressed with the 150-500 from the shots I have seen popping up. I have always liked the Bigma and was thinking about buying one a short time ago but sticking with Canon
p.1 #10 · *UPDATED* A Sigma 50-500 150-500 comparison
davekone wrote:
I figured I took the time to do this, they can deal with a little scrolling or load the photos side by side in their favorite image editor.
I guess you can't keep all people happy all the time. Thanks for the efforts and review.
p.1 #17 · *UPDATED* A Sigma 50-500 150-500 comparison
After shooting with the lens yesterday and a few more tests today I can say that I am consistently getting better shots with OS turned off. This copy is definitely softer in the 400-500mm range versus the 50-500. I can say that below 400mm it is on par with the 50-500.
This copy is going back to Sigma, the OS issue is baffling. I purchased this lens hoping for decent OS performance in the 300mm+ range in less than ideal light. As of the moment it seems to do more damage on than off.
After this one is sent back I will update everyone again. I will also say that my 1st 50-500 was not nearly as good in the 400+ range as my second copy. We will see.
p.1 #18 · *UPDATED* A Sigma 50-500 150-500 comparison
I wouldn't touch the 120-400 or 150-500 until they release the mk II versions. Sigma lately has been releasing lenses that don't live up to expectations like the original 50-150 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8 macro and have now replaced them. There have been a lot of issues with the 120-400 and apparently 150-500. I'd be waiting a lot longer before going near them. Shame really as the 150-500 is something I'd like. I wish Canon would get a 150-500 f/4.5-5.6L IS out the door.
BTW is the 150-500 closer to actually being a 500mm than the Bigma which is really more a 465mm?
