New FW for Sigma 150-600 lenses

There is new FW for both the Sport and Contemporary lenses and one of the claimed benefits is improved AF accuracy.  You need either the Sigma dock or to send the lens in for the FW update.

Will this require AF fine tune recalibration? I hope not.

steve white wrote:Will this require AF fine tune recalibration? I hope not.

TBD - I'll know later this week when I get a chance to test this.

E.J. Peiker wrote:

steve white wrote:Will this require AF fine tune recalibration? I hope not.

TBD - I'll know later this week when I get a chance to test this.

I updated mine and it seemed to have kept all my dock settings throughout. I took a few test shots out in the field today and everything looked the same on both bodies I calibrated.Fingers crossed.......

Based on info it is only applicable to Canon or Sigma mounts.

We would like to announce the availability of a new firmware update for the SIGMA 150-600mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM | Sports in SIGMA and Canon mount, and the SIGMA 150-600mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM | Contemporary in SIGMA and Canon mount. The firmware can be updated using SIGMA Optimization Pro.

The lens firmware update improves the AF accuracy and reduces the operating sound of the diaphragm blades when it is attached with the SIGMA MOUNT CONVERTER MC-11.

For customers who own the following applicable products and the SIGMA USB DOCK, please update the lens firmware using SIGMA Optimization Pro.

【Applicable products】
SIGMA 150-600mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM | Sports – SIGMA and Canon mount
SIGMA 150-600mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM | Contemporary – SIGMA and Canon mount

【Benefits of this firmware update】
Improved the AF accuracy when the lens is attached with the SIGMA MOUNT CONVERTER MC-11.
※ For customers who own SIGMA MOUNT CONVERTER MC-11, it is necessary to update this to the latest firmware Ver1.02.
Improved the AF accuracy of this lens when mounted on the SIGMA sd Quattro (SIGMA mount only).
Reduced the operating sound of the lens diaphragm blades when attached with the SIGMA MOUNT CONVERTER MC-11 EF-E and used for shooting movies (Canon mount only).
Improved the AF accuracy when the lens is used for shooting movies as well as Live View on EOS DIGITAL SLR cameras (Canon mount only).*1
Reduced the operating sound of the lens diaphragm blades when used for shooting movies on EOS DIGITAL SLR cameras (Canon mount only).*1
Full functionality with the Canon Digital Cinema Camera EOS C300 Mark II.
*1 The degree of improvement differs depending on the camera used.

I'm seeing about a -2 point shift at the long focal lengths which is pretty much in the noise and within the shot to shot error and could just be due to temperature changes or drift with age. Not much to be concerned about in my opinion.

EJ, I know this is going a bit off topic here, but can I ask you if you are totally happy with your Sigma 150-600 for bird photography after moving to it from the 500 VR? Are there any tips or tricks you have learned to make it perform to its peak potential? Lastly, does this FW update make the lens any sharper or is it just about AF accuracy and/or speed?

I am so close to just "biting the bullet" and selling my 500 VR for this lens. Are you happy you did?

Thanks

Tim Zurowski wrote:EJ, I know this is going a bit off topic here, but can I ask you if you are totally happy with your Sigma 150-600 for bird photography after moving to it from the 500 VR? Are there any tips or tricks you have learned to make it perform to its peak potential? Lastly, does this FW update make the lens any sharper or it just about AF accuracy and/or speed?

I am so close to just "biting the bullet" and selling my 500 VR for this lens. Are you happy you did?

Thanks

The update is for Canon and Sigma versions of the lens and is meant to address issues with focusing with their MC-11 adapter primarily.

I am happy for what the lens is, a lens that costs 1/5 of the big super teles and adds vesatility by being a zoom and is MUCH easier to travel with due to the much smaller size.  No it isn't quite as good as a super tele, especially the latest versions but then it costs 20% of them so thinking it should be is foolish IMHO. It is after all 1 1/3 stops slower so you are that much closer to shooting it wide open for the same final picture and wide open is never a lens' best regime.  I shoot the Sigma at f/8 and it is very good there but at f/6.3 it is nowhere near as good as a 600 f/4 shot at f/6.3 nor should anyone expect it to be.  The real question is if it is good enough for professional work and the answer to that is yes.  But forget using it with the Sigma TC - that combo is not good enough for professional work (but neither is the Nikon 200-400 that costs more than 3 times as much).

Thanks EJ but please let me clarify my interest and questions about this lens. I too am only considering this switch for the versatility of a zoom in a smaller lighter package. However, I never said that I expect this lens to be on par with any of the big primes at any setting. On the other hand, I am hoping that it might be somewhere near 80%+ the IQ of a good prime I am just trying to make the call if I will regret selling my 500 VR or not. In other words, are the gains going to outweigh the losses. The gains being much cheaper, more versatile, lighter and smaller, and the losses being overall IQ and usability with the TC. I am unable to properly test this lens here in town, so I need to make the call with the help of knowledgeable people like yourself. If you are happy with your results with the lens, and based on your comment that it is good enough for professional work, then I trust you. I am really close to making the switch. I wish I was wealthy enough to just purchase it and keep both, but that is just not in the cards. On my trip to Costa Rica earlier this year, I found my 500 to be a major pain to lug around, and it is just getting more & more difficult as I age and with rotator cuff injuries in both shoulders.

Can you comment on my question about the FW update?

I think the big downside, which is also it's upside from a size perspective, is that it's f/6.3 and like I said in the earlier post, that it needs to be stopped down from there to get the most out of it so you simply can't isolate subjects in the same way and retain sharpness. There are definite trade-offs. only you can determine whether those trade-offs are acceptable to you. Consider it a 150-600 f/8 lens for good image quality. If that works for you then it might be a good option. Oh and since it is collecting less than half the light, the AF won't be as snappy or as good at following fast moving subjects. That's not to say that it can't be used for that type of photography but you will notice that your technique has to be better.

Tim Zurowski, many folks in my area use this lens and what concerns me is the background is not as clean (not suff. out-of-focus) to help pop and isolate the subjects. I use the 600mm f4 lens, usually at about f5.6 or a half stop less and the background looks much better than folks shooting next to me with the 150-600. Just my two cents. I shoot mostly wildlife but I believe the same would apply to birds.

I love this lens and have used to to somewhat replace my older Canon EF 400 f2.8. which is pretty much sitting idle. After spending a full day with the Spyder Lenscal and dialing it in last summer, I have no issues. I shoot it with both my old Dinosaur Mark IIN whch by the way is still ticking awa and the new 7D Mark II. I primarily shoot at f7.1 and the sharpness is just dandy. I shoot at times at f6.3 and still find it acceptable.

Looking on the lighter end, weight-wise, how would this lens compare with the Nikon 300 f/4 with  the 1.4III TC?  Any comparison at all?

Cynthia Crawford wrote:Looking on the lighter end, weight-wise, how would this lens compare with the Nikon 300 f/4 with  the 1.4III TC?  Any comparison at all?

Weight wise the 300+1.4x of course wins by a mile.  IQ wise it's probably a wash.  But realize there is a HUGE difference between 420mm and 600mm

Cynthia, assuming you are talking about the Sigma 150-600 compared to the Nikon 300 VR, there really is no comparison. The 300 alone and with TC are going to be way smaller and lighter. From my experiences using both lenses (albeit only half a day with the Sigma) the 300 VR is sharper both with and without the TC. The advantages the Sigma offers are the flexibility of a zoom and more focal length (i.e. 600mm vs 420mm). If I understand what you are trying to achieve regarding size and weight, I do not believe the Sigma is an option for you.

Tim Zurowski wrote:If I understand what you are trying to achieve regarding size and weight, I do not believe the Sigma is an option for you.

The 200-500 might be though...

Many people start shooting birds with a 300 f4 (or 70-200) plus TC. Later on they realize they need longer lenses and move on to something bigger, heavier. As light as many agree that the D500 + 300 f4 is, it's not that light and small anymore once you get longer lenses. If portability is a concern, I don't think there's any other option but to get cameras of smaller sensor sizes. Perhaps at a certain point image quality could be hazardous to your health.

DChan wrote:Many people start shooting birds with a 300 f4 (or 70-200) plus TC. Later on they realize they need longer lenses and move on to something bigger, heavier. As light as many agree that the D500 + 300 f4 is, it's not that light and small anymore once you get longer lenses. If portability is a concern, I don't think there's any other option but to get cameras of smaller sensor sizes. Perhaps at a certain point image quality could be hazardous to your health.

There's the RX10 Mk III  20mp, 24-600 equiv f/4 (which is f/11 DOF equivalent).