Sigma 150-600 f/5-6.3 DG OS Sport Lens Review

E.J. Peiker wrote:On predictable flyers it will have no problem at all - I haven't tested the new firmware yet but it is supposed to noticeably improve AF-C function and tracking too. The fundamental difficulty with this lens is getting it calibrated through the zoom range and at different distances.  It is not an easy task and takes many hours of trial and error with the camera, lens and dock as described in a number of the posts above.  Doing this is not for the faint of heart and if you don't do it the lens won't perform well.  Once you do get it all tuned its great but I would venture to guess that 95% of the people interested in this lens have neither the technical capability nor patience to really dial it in and then will complain about lack of sharpness.  And if you don't go through the calibration rigor with the dock, it is not a great performer at all.  Sure you can use the camera's facility to calibrate it at the longest focal length and at a single distance but then why bother with a zoom lens at all.  And then, I haven't even begun to test the temperature effects on the calibration.

I've redone mine 3 times now and want to do it again making just tiny tweaks from previous calibration efforts.  It takes about 6 hours to do it properly.  It's worth it to me due to the amount I travel and the increasing difficulty of traveling especially on other continents where the restrictions and policing of them are astronomically higher than here.  If you already have a 500 and don't fly outside of North America much, I'm not sure I would go through the effort.

Mike in O wrote:Maybe I shoot super teles zooms different from other folks, but I buy them for the long end and the zoom just allows me to find the subject in the viewfinder.  My biggest problem with a 600f4 is getting the subject in the viewfinder with its narrow FOV.  It seems that micro adjusting the two longest FL would be all that was required for normal use.  I just ordered the Tamron 150/600 ($779 what a deal) and hope it is usable to 550mm.  I do have 500 and 600f4s but they are a pain especially shooting out of a car.

Mark Picard wrote:

Mike in O wrote:Maybe I shoot super teles zooms different from other folks, but I buy them for the long end and the zoom just allows me to find the subject in the viewfinder.  My biggest problem with a 600f4 is getting the subject in the viewfinder with its narrow FOV.  It seems that micro adjusting the two longest FL would be all that was required for normal use.  I just ordered the Tamron 150/600 ($779 what a deal) and hope it is usable to 550mm.  I do have 500 and 600f4s but they are a pain especially shooting out of a car.

Tamron 150-600mm? Don't you mean Sigma?

Mike in O wrote:

Mark Picard wrote:

Mike in O wrote:Maybe I shoot super teles zooms different from other folks, but I buy them for the long end and the zoom just allows me to find the subject in the viewfinder.  My biggest problem with a 600f4 is getting the subject in the viewfinder with its narrow FOV.  It seems that micro adjusting the two longest FL would be all that was required for normal use.  I just ordered the Tamron 150/600 ($779 what a deal) and hope it is usable to 550mm.  I do have 500 and 600f4s but they are a pain especially shooting out of a car.

Tamron 150-600mm? Don't you mean Sigma?

Since the Sigma doesn't come in Sony A mount, the Tamron is the only slow super tele available to me and MFA pertains to it also.

Vertigo wrote:wow detail is here at 600/8 on not too much crowded sensor.

Ideally I would need to see a few BIF pictures, or at least of something moving and further away, to really believe in the lens potential. You know, the kind of subjects where a 500/4 is (was ?) king.

Tim Zurowski wrote:Dave, I don't mind the light at all in the first image. In fact, I prefer overcast light when my BG is not sky or water. Any chance we could see these as 100% crops without any sharpening applied?

My local camera store is going to have the Sport model in stock on November 16th. I have arranged with them that I come down with my Nikon 500 VR and take both lenses out for a test. If the Sigma tests as well as I am hoping, I am seriously considering selling my Nikon 500 for the Sigma.

E.J. Peiker wrote:

Tim Zurowski wrote:Dave, I don't mind the light at all in the first image. In fact, I prefer overcast light when my BG is not sky or water. Any chance we could see these as 100% crops without any sharpening applied?

My local camera store is going to have the Sport model in stock on November 16th. I have arranged with them that I come down with my Nikon 500 VR and take both lenses out for a test. If the Sigma tests as well as I am hoping, I am seriously considering selling my Nikon 500 for the Sigma.

How are you going to compare them without a proper focus cal?  The only way this will be a legitimate test is if you use Live View to focus.

david fletcher wrote:guys,  there is not much I should add now.  I've given input to highlight and help;   based no my own experience to date, i think this lens is great on a bean bag.  awkward on a Gitzo as the foot space is poor.. (how I wish the prats that designed the lens actually use it!!).  

sorry to the "prats", but for crikes sake, did they not even think to test it on the likely hood that a user would use a Gimbal at some time!.     How many people may not buy the lens on that basis, bar for a simple design adjustment.

regarding the most important quality, the IQ, I'v been very happy.  

regarding bokeh, as that is dependent upon the subject distance, light quality and the distance between subject and bg, to date, this lens is ok for me.