about | support
home
 

Search Used

Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 AF APO DG OS

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
54 224664 Dec 22, 2013
Recommended By Average Price
85% of reviewers $993.55
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
8.63
9.41
8.5
150-500

Specifications:
Lens Construction 21 Elements in 15 Groups
Angle of View 16.4 - 5 degrees
Number of Diaphragm Blades 9 Blades
Minimum Aperture F22
Minimum Focusing Distance 220cm/86.6 in.
Maximum Magnification 1:5.2
Filter Size Diameter 86mm
Filter Size Bayonet-type Hood
Dimensions Diameter 94.7mm X Length 252mm
3.7 in. X 9.9 in.
Weight 1910g / 67.4 oz.


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4  next
      
RCicala
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Jan 8, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2955
Review Date: Sep 12, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 6 

Pros: The price is great. The lens is adequate quality and the stabilization system works very well.
Cons:
Horrid quality control. Very heavy lens. Very. Heavy.

I was expecting a 50-500 replacement so I probably set myself up for disappointment a bit. This lens isn't as sharp as the 50-500, and is a bit heavier. But then at the price, and with excellent stabilization it is a reasonable value.

Quality control totally sucks though. And even when I got a working copy (the third try - one stabilization was defective, one would autofocus with a horrid grinding sound and get stuck) I found it was just too heavy for me. Others may not but if I'm going to carry this much weight around I'll go with a better quality lens.


Sep 12, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add RCicala to your Buddy List  
johnmh
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 26, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 88
Review Date: Sep 3, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $980.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Good reach for the size and money. Appropriate value for he money relative to others in the category.
Cons:
Slow relative to other lenses but any faster and you'd have a more expensive, larger heavier lens.

IMO you're getting what you pay for with this lens, though I wish Sigma had charged $500 more and put a little higher quality into it.

I have a Nikon 200-400VR - it's a great lens but large and heavy - and 5-6 times more expensive than this lens. I was hoping for an updated 80-400 AF-S VR but have so far waited in vain. Wanting a smaller, lighter 'carry' lens for backcountry treks I picked up the 150-500, going for its slightly longer reach over the 120-400 - an advantage for wildlife.

I got what I expected, a pretty good lens for the money. It can be used hand-held - though a monopod is a good idea at longer lengths. Generally got good shots with it but noticed that it's easy to knock the OS switch to 'off' - and it shows in the end result. You have to be careful in mediocre light - it'll take longer to lock in focus - you will notice the lens speed in less than ideal conditions.

On a tripod, this lens gives much better results. However that's not what I wanted it for. While shooting elk in RMNP, another photographer with a 170-500 on a tripod with a remote was rather impressed with what I was getting hand-held or on a monopod.

This lens let me get shots I couldn't have gotten without carrying around the larger and heavier 200-400. I was also able to leave it on the back seat and shoot from the car when unexpected shots came up - it was small enough to maneuver in the car. The 200-400 is NOT as easy to maneuver in comparison.

I may still buy an updated 80-400 if Nikon ever makes an AF-S version, but I expect it'll cost $500 more (at least) than this lens - almost 50% more for less reach.

Some complain that theyre not getting their money's worth from this lens but compared to other 400mm/500mm zooms, you're getting an internal focusing motor, vibration reduction and the reach for under $1000. Compared to an older Tokina 80-400 I picked up, this lens was about 50% more expensive for far more functionality and quality (albeit in a larger package). It's only marginally longer than the Nikon 80-400.

Compared to other lenses - Sigma, Tokina, Tamron, even Nikon, this lens is priced appropriately for what you get. It's more than some of the other 400/500mm lenses that lack OS/VR, slightly less than the Bigma (50-500) which surprises me, and significantly less than the Nikon 80-400 which lacks an internal focusing motor and is limited to 400mm.

I wouldn't have minded paying more - and getting a bit more, but that wasn't an option - unfortunately.


Sep 3, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add johnmh to your Buddy List  
Ocean 6
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 13, 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
Review Date: Aug 26, 2008 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 6 

Pros: good built, very good OS
Cons:
slowly AF, not precise, nor on Nikon, nor on Canon; OS is strange noise; to heavy; dont like the surface

I tested the 150-500 against Sigma OS 120-400 and Canon 100-400 IS.
I choose the Sigma OS 120-400. It is far better then the others.
But Canon has no AF trobles and f his focus is much faster.
Wondering why these are no EX-Lenses.
The 150-500 ist good until 300 mm. But therefore its to heavy and large.


Aug 26, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Ocean 6 to your Buddy List  
inukshuk
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 27, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 61
Review Date: Aug 23, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Built Like a tank, Super smooth zooming, Great OS and HSM, Hand holdable, Great range
Cons:
Considering it's a 500mm. NONE

This is my first super telephoto lens. So when I got it I found it big and heavy compared to my 70-200 f/2.8. But then it's not in the same ball park.
HSM is great and so is the OS and you can hear feel it work.
I'm slowly getting to understand this beast and it's getting more and more comfortable now that I'm learning how to work with it. Which is something you have to give time to do.
I love where the manual focus ring is centered with it's handle making doing MF super easy just with my thumb while hand holding. Images in full frame are really nice even at 500mm.
Now it just stays on my camera waiting for nice weather.
Bottom Line: Built Like a tank, Super smooth zooming, Great OS and HSM, Hand holdable, Great range,
A must have.
Oh yea and comes with a 10 year warranty in Canada.


Aug 23, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add inukshuk to your Buddy List  
gustabod
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 5, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 3
Review Date: Aug 20, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,100.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: sharp, HSM motor, handling, price
Cons:
filter cost, big, AF response slow in older bodies

Ignoring the price for a moment, this lens offers a good option with the ultrasonic motor and optical image stabilisation for anyone looking at a versatile tele. Add the low price (compared to the Canon or Nikon options in this specification/range) and the value delivered is excellent. I was doubtful at first that it was a good buy, but have been using it since I got it (more than my Canon 100-400 L IS), and getting very satisfactory results. It is no prime, and the AF response can be sluggish with older (Canon) bodies, but have had no AF problems otherwise. I don't do birding, but I did some bird test shots and found images with very good resolution and accurate focus. use it mainly for kids soccer games, very happy with servo tracking on my Canon 40D. Recommend to anyone looking for a general purpose stabilised tele-zoom.

Aug 20, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add gustabod to your Buddy List  
exphose
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 27, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 60
Review Date: Aug 18, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: stabilized 500mm for under $1k USD, good sharpness, handholdable, EX build quality
Cons:
Slower lens = slower AF, more hunting and OOF shots than with a 300 F4 prime and similar faster lenses, about the same as my 300 F4L IS with 1.4 TC. Loud OS, bulky but not unmanageable, zoom creeps quite a bit if not locked and positive pressure kept on zoom ring if shooting steep vertical angles.

I think this lens is quite worthy of a "9" rating if properly considered.

The 150-500 range is quite usable, one could easily get away with having only a wide zoom and this lens, and this would be a great start to telephoto lenses for the user who wants more reach than the typical 75-300 VR or 70-200 F4 IS can give them.

I'm used to only fast lenses, I used to only have F2.8 and larger, and now F4 with IS and larger. Going to a F5-6.3 is quite a loss in light, and this cannot be forgotten, but what you need to remember is that wanting faster than this by even a little bit gets you into the $3k-$6k price range and the 11lb behemoth in the pelican case to tote around with the sturdy tripod and wimberly.

Yes, obviously, it's no where near a 500 F4 IS. But it also is better to fill the frame with this 500mm lens, than take a crop from a 70-200 2.8 IS from the same distance. So it is quite a useful lens for someone who wants to travel light or take holiday without massive lenses and still take acceptably sharp photos when in decent light.

After understanding what I was getting with this lens, there were not many negatives for the price. The lens hood is a bit cheap, the zoom creep is a little annoying, it's not instantly snap focusing due to lower light, there's no focus limit switch, the OS off/on-1/on-2 switch is annoying compared to a dedicated OS on/off and mode switch. The 82mm filter size means expensive filters if you would use any, etc.

Proper shooting technique must be used as the 500mm, especially on a crop body, increases the amount of camera shake by quite a bit over a 200-300mm long lens.

All in all it's a great buy, and as a user with only telephoto prime lenses and no zooms, a great addition to the kit both for the flexibility and the travel size.

The only thought I had is the Canon 100-400L may be the better lens, but it is also 50% more expensive, 100mm shorter and only slightly faster, push-pull design, older IS system, and a bit better overall quality in build and optics. Not enough to have either lens blow the other out of the water, but I would consider the 100-400L if I had not had the faster prime telephoto's as well, because stopping action needs light, and every little bit helps. It is a good thing about this lens that it is a difficult decision.


You can see some of my shots from a local airshow:

http://russell.exphose.com/p964778700

and some shots in my lens review section:

http://russell.exphose.com/f861564365/

Thanks!


Aug 18, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add exphose to your Buddy List  
BrumJam
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 16, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 15
Review Date: Aug 16, 2008 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 6 

Pros: Good value considering focal length and OS. Sharp up to about 300mm. Built like a tank.
Cons:
Softness beyond 300mm, slightly over saturated colours, highlight detail not great.

I really wanted to like this lens. On paper it looks great but unfortunately in my opinion the IQ is not good enough for a lens costing almost 700. The copy I have shows good sharpness up to about 300mm but beyond that it's too soft for my liking, which is a pity, because the whole point of this lens is the lure of 300-500mm.

In comparison to my other lenses (Canon 24-70L, 70-200L) colour reproduction is also slightly off the mark, with reds and greens in particular looking slightly oversaturated.

Mine is going back to the shop to be replaced by a Canon 100-400 L. It's 300 more expensive but the results more than make up for it.

Hopefully Sigma will one day make a telephoto zoom good enough for me to spend my money somewhere other than my local Canon dealer.


Aug 16, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add BrumJam to your Buddy List  
Don Abernathy
Offline



Registered: Dec 11, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 36
Review Date: Aug 14, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $975.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: sharp, not that big, better than the sigma 50-500 and tamron 200-500 I have previously owned
Cons:
none

This lens is surprisingly sharp. I would highly recommend it.

Aug 14, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Don Abernathy to your Buddy List  
tokyololas
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 21, 2007
Location: Japan
Posts: 0
Review Date: Aug 10, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated

Pros: Fantastic value for $$ 500mm reach Surprised by capabilities
Cons:
Heavy (but that goes without saying and is actually not too bad with the lens strap on)

I am very pleasantly surprised with this lens in terms of performance in a variety of situations and would not hesitate to recommend it if you are looking for reach, but don't want to pay Canon L lens prices (for me, it was an obvious choice because I live in the middle of the city and don't often require such a long lens, so the $ savings can be allocated to other lenses)

Posted a series of test shots and first impressions here:
http://www.tokyololas.com/sigma150-500mm.html
(includes ISO 1000 no-flash night shots and candid people shots)


Aug 10, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add tokyololas to your Buddy List  
scottsymonds
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 1, 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 0
Review Date: Aug 1, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: IQ, build, range, OS
Cons:
A touch heavy??!

Excellent value for money. Mine is sharp, the OS is excellent and it focuses quickly and quietly. Very sharp up to 400mm and stopped down to f8, it still produces images wide open at 500mm that I'm happy with. Useable handheld at speeds as low as 100th second if you're careful.

I don't regret choosing this over the 100-400 one bit. For the amount I use this range, this lens was a great choice. I'll stick the 1000 bucks I saved towards upgrading my more heavily used 70-200 to a 2.8 IS I think... Smile


Aug 1, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add scottsymonds to your Buddy List  
Bill HIttle
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 22, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jul 27, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated

Pros:
Cons:

I live in Nebraska so I can not get close to a 150-500mm Sigma lens. I had a friend test it against a 100-400mm Canon. I have uploaded a zip file of the full sized files for you to decide. It is 7.5 meg.

All pictures were taken with a canon Rebel XT hand held. They have been resized with Windows XP resized to original size just to compress them some. I have left the EXIF data in the photos for you to look at.

He tried to set the zoom the same on both lens's with the readings on lens, it is not perfect but close.

The files are names y-x.jpg, when the x is odd it is the canon file and when it is even it is the sigma file. When y is 1 it is wide open aperture and when it is 2 it means F8 on both the Canon and Sigma.

The Sigma and the Canon were both brand new at the dealers location. There must have been something wrong with the canon because in the outdoor pictures there is some blue fringing on the right side of the church tower. The canon I own has none of this fringing so I have to assume that the new one has some problems. He did seem to have more "keepers" with the Sigma. This may have been because of problems with the Canon lens.

I have not included any of the photos taken at 500mm with the Sigma but they are very sharp for hand held at 500mm.

Just looking at the photos I find I like the Simga color and saturation in most cases better. I think I will get one to to see how well it works for me.

http://www.thehittles.com/testfiles.zip


Jul 27, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Bill HIttle to your Buddy List  
Bubblegum
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 23, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 1
Review Date: Jul 23, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $979.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: 500mm - Hand held - Build - HSM - under 1K
Cons:
none

At the end of the day - for under 1K - you get an lens with 500mm - HSM with OS which can be hand hold - I'm not sure about other lenses in this focal range in regardless of price that you can do that - which brings to mind the real strength of this lens that I don't hear mentioned much - most will wish it will be an f/4 or sharper etc - if all those wishes comes true - then the last thing to wish for is the ability to hand hold which this lens already offer.

Here are some shots taken after two days of 'playing' around with this new lens: http://flickr.com/photos/jkwebzone/


Jul 23, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Bubblegum to your Buddy List  
eastkent64
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 19, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jul 19, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Image quality/price, build quality and OS
Cons:
Too early to say

I recently sold a Tamron 200-500mm lens and bought the Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 APO DG OS lens for wildlife photography. Probably like many Canon users I was torn between buying the Canon 400mm f/5.6 or the Canon 100-400mm. If money was no object I would have chosen the Canon EF 500mm f/4.0 L IS USM. Back in the real world, I opted for the Sigma 150-500mm because of the extra reach and the OS system, at an affordable price!

First impressions are very positive, the lens seems to be EX standard in terms of build quality (even though it doesn't have the EX designation). The lens is definitely light enough to be hand holdable, and the OS system seems quick, effective and quiet (despite some reports that it is noisy). One thing that is immediately apparent compared to my Tamron 200-500mm, is the bokeh is much more pleasing.

The lens is light enough to carry around all day, all my shots so far have been taken handheld. I definitely get a lot more 'keepers' compared to the Tamron 200-500mm and when using it yesterday in fading light I was able to get some shots hand-held which wouldn't have possible with the Tamron 200-500mm.

I've posted some shots taken with this lens at the following link:

http://www.pbase.com/eastkent64/sigma_150500mm

I've only had this lens for a few days, but overall I'm very happy with it. In terms of image quality/price this lens is a bit of a bargain.


Jul 19, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add eastkent64 to your Buddy List  
coppertop
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 21, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1462
Review Date: Jul 18, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $979.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: AF Speed, lighter feel than the Bigma (even though Sigma reports it's heavier)
Cons:
OS is loud

I tested an early production copy (serial number in the mid-1000 range) and had problems with the OS shuttering at times, knocking the image out of focus.

I recieved a second copy that was a later production copy (SN# in the upper 9000 range) and the problems with the OS were not present.

The lens focused well and image quality was good. The 150-500mm is supposed to be heavier than the Sigma 50-500mm but it handles as if it's lighter. It seems better balanced so that may make it feel lighter even though it isn't.

The only drawback is the OS noise. It makes a very noticeable sound when the OS activates or stops. If the noise level of the Canon 100-400mm is a 5, the 150-500mm is a 9. Once it gets running, there's a faint hum but nothing annoying.

If OS was quieter, then this would be an exceptionally good lens.


Jul 18, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add coppertop to your Buddy List  
nugeny
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Jan 21, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5293
Review Date: Jul 18, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $975.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: see below
Cons:
see below

Here is my conclusion and comp. There is no comparable model for NIkon and Canon, so I took the one that has 500mm fl.

Sigma 150-500 OS Nikon/Canon 500/4 IS or VR


IQ 6.5 9.5
Built Q 6.5 9.5
Price 9.5 6.5
Portability 9.5 6.5
__________________________________________________
Total 32/40 32/40

Value: Take your pick depending on your preference:
I+Built Q vs. Price +Portability
The Sigma delivers acceptable IQ and great portability.
The 500/4 delivers excellent IQ, but for most very limited portability if any.


Jul 18, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add nugeny to your Buddy List  
nugeny
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Jan 21, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5293
Review Date: Jul 10, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $975.00

Pros:
Cons:

Well, I am getting there. I have this lens for the whole 2 days now. Here is my impresion and decision:
1-- I will keep this lens.
2--I will be evaluating it in the next few days/weeks for itself (150-500, not prime, # $950.00, and specially 100% handheld).
3--- I will not compare it with 500/4 IS that I did have (prime and $6000.00 and 100% tripod)
4--I will not compare it with 70-200/2.8 VR, handheld but not quite the reach even whit 1.7x tc and way more $$$)--

I bought this lens because I was tired of trucking the 500/4 and tired of not having the reach I want with 70-200. I wanted Handhollding.

So I will report 150-500 with iimages about itself on its own merit and no unfair comparison.

so stay tuned for few more days.

The Lightmagician
Sun is my eye
Winds my breaths
Sky my open Mind.
http://www.lightmagical.com


Jul 10, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add nugeny to your Buddy List  




Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 AF APO DG OS

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
54 224664 Dec 22, 2013
Recommended By Average Price
85% of reviewers $993.55
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
8.63
9.41
8.5
150-500


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4  next