Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 64 votes, 4.94 average.
Old Tuesday 11th November 2014, 17:45   #76
micloi
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Warwick
Posts: 574
That's good to hear. It's a very good lens.
micloi is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 12th November 2014, 22:52   #77
Mickr
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 380
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Mark View Post
had a chance to play with the Tammy last weekend and I dont think I would want to handle another two pounds. The Tammy is all I want to use hand held.
Steve
My current heaviest lens is just over 4lbs and I thought that I would never be able to use it the first couple of times I went out with it. You do get used to heavier weights after a while. I recently had to go to physio and was told that the muscles on the left side of my body were unusually well developed and I can only put that down to the lens I use.

My next lens will be between 50% heavier than my current heaviest or almost double and I expect I'll moan about it for the first few trips and then it will become normal, I hope.
Mickr is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th November 2014, 12:29   #78
monographix
Nick

 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Here
Posts: 3
Micloi , hows the AF performance, mainly speed and ofcourse accuracy, with the Sigma TC on, on both D7100 and D810?
monographix is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th November 2014, 12:34   #79
micloi
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Warwick
Posts: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by monographix View Post
Micloi , hows the AF performance, mainly speed and ofcourse accuracy, with the Sigma TC on, on both D7100 and D810?
Slower than with the bare lens (obviously) but still a little faster than the 120-300mm + 2x TC

Reliable in good light but hunts a little in low light (but you wouldn't use the 1.4x then anyway).

Overall quite usable.
micloi is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th November 2014, 12:38   #80
monographix
Nick

 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Here
Posts: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by micloi View Post
Slower than with the bare lens (obviously) but still a little faster than the 120-300mm + 2x TC

Reliable in good light but hunts a little in low light (but you wouldn't use the 1.4x then anyway).

Overall quite usable.
Thanks. Very useful information you have been providing through this thread. Differences you would note between D7100 and D810 with the 150-600 ?
Am i correct concluding by your test images that the sigma with the TC at 840 is sharper than the tamron at 600?
monographix is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th November 2014, 12:43   #81
micloi
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Warwick
Posts: 574
Να'σαι καλά :)

The Sigma with the 1.4x is approximately as sharp as the Tamron at 600mm

Both the D7100 and D810 work very well in good light.
In low light the D810 is better due to the better high ISO.

AF is very good with both bodies.
micloi is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th November 2014, 12:54   #82
Paul Jarvis
Registered Member
 
Paul Jarvis's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rufford, Lancashire
Posts: 8,681
Good to know the TC works well for the extra reach and with the flexibility.
__________________
Follow me on Facebook and Flickr @ Paul Jarvis Images for the latest pictures.
Paul Jarvis is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 23rd November 2014, 11:19   #83
micloi
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Warwick
Posts: 574
I had a lighter 105mm screw-on hood that I tried with the Sigma. Works well and is lighter.
For comparison the Tamron 150-600 hood is 90g, the Sigma 150-600 is 295g!
The new hood is only 135g so brings the weight of the Sigma down to 2700g (same as the Canon 300mm MKII + 2x III TC)

Also it brings the weight balance closer to the camera making to much easier to hold.

Also I am testing the Canon fit one at the moment with a 7D, AF works very well with it.
micloi is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 24th November 2014, 17:07   #84
the black fox
Registered User
 
the black fox's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: flint
Posts: 616
be interested to see the results with a canon mic ,get some shots on flickr LOL
__________________
see more of my wildlife photos @ http://www.flickr.com/photos/31671466@N07/
the black fox is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 27th November 2014, 20:44   #85
micloi
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Warwick
Posts: 574
Both the Nikon and Canon versions dressed up courtesy of Outdoor Photography Gear!
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	1.jpg
Views:	181
Size:	218.3 KB
ID:	523646  Click image for larger version

Name:	2.jpg
Views:	177
Size:	179.0 KB
ID:	523647  Click image for larger version

Name:	3.jpg
Views:	172
Size:	184.1 KB
ID:	523648  
micloi is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 29th November 2014, 23:53   #86
the black fox
Registered User
 
the black fox's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: flint
Posts: 616
certainly looks a beast ,but how does the canon version perform, is it better than the tamron ,can you track b.i.f with it ,is it hand holdable for the b.i.f .taking into account our respective sizes how would mere mortals cope !!!
__________________
see more of my wildlife photos @ http://www.flickr.com/photos/31671466@N07/

Last edited by the black fox : Saturday 29th November 2014 at 23:55.
the black fox is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 30th November 2014, 00:21   #87
micloi
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Warwick
Posts: 574
I only managed to really try the Nikon one but I do not see why there should be any difference with the Canon version.

Why don't you visit and give it a go? :)
micloi is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 30th November 2014, 22:36   #88
the black fox
Registered User
 
the black fox's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: flint
Posts: 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by micloi View Post
I only managed to really try the Nikon one but I do not see why there should be any difference with the Canon version.

Why don't you visit and give it a go? :)
going to a in-store sigma day next saturday mic ,if they fail to turn up with one or both of them i might take you up on that offer .be good to meet up again
__________________
see more of my wildlife photos @ http://www.flickr.com/photos/31671466@N07/
the black fox is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 30th November 2014, 23:10   #89
micloi
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Warwick
Posts: 574
Sounds like a plan :)
micloi is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 1st December 2014, 07:51   #90
Paul Jarvis
Registered Member
 
Paul Jarvis's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rufford, Lancashire
Posts: 8,681
Can you post some pics please and what are your thoughts on AF speed and accuracy, for me they need to be seriously good to justify the weight if I'm gonna get one.
__________________
Follow me on Facebook and Flickr @ Paul Jarvis Images for the latest pictures.
Paul Jarvis is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 1st December 2014, 11:30   #91
micloi
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Warwick
Posts: 574
First 5 photos on my flickr account are with the Sigma:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/87805817@N00/

AF speed is very good especially when using the limiter. Added advantage is the option to change the speed and accuracy with the usb dock and also the limiter range.

As comparison I would say I find the AF speed and accuracy to be at least as good if not better as the Canon 300mm II + 2x TC which was my favourite lens just before I changed to Nikon.
micloi is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 1st December 2014, 23:35   #92
hosesbroadbill
Registered User
 
hosesbroadbill's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Staten Island, NY
Posts: 436
Comparison

I have been monitoring this site and others about this lens. Like all of us who are looking for the best walk around birding lens that gets us as close as possible. I have been very happy with my Tamron and have said so many times. The Sigma at twice the cost and more weight really need to be a big step up for me to sell my lens.

Here is a shot I got the other day in pretty good light of a Mallard

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553...2/15721471898/

Here is a shot that someone else got of a Mallard with a a d800 and the Sigma. The picture quality of the d800 is be better as it is a full frame. And it is not a direct comparison so hard to tell, but in my opinion there is no way that I would ever get a shot like this with my Tamron. Or is it just that I will never get a shot like that with a 7dii?

http://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php?t=1096679&l=en

Thoughts?
__________________
Isaac Grant

Last edited by hosesbroadbill : Tuesday 2nd December 2014 at 01:07.
hosesbroadbill is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 2nd December 2014, 01:21   #93
njlarsen
Opus Editor
 
njlarsen's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Portsmouth, Dominica
Posts: 20,198
The D800 shot seems over-sharpened/over-processed to me to an extent where I would be ashamed of publishing it. I prefer your image with the tammy.

Niels
__________________
Support bird conservation in the Caribbean: BirdCaribbean
njlarsen is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 2nd December 2014, 01:40   #94
hosesbroadbill
Registered User
 
hosesbroadbill's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Staten Island, NY
Posts: 436
Interesting

Quote:
Originally Posted by njlarsen View Post
The D800 shot seems over-sharpened/over-processed to me to an extent where I would be ashamed of publishing it. I prefer your image with the tammy.

Niels
Maybe there goes my bad screen at work again!!! I actually just today ordered a major upgrade to my lousy lap top screen. It is funny because most of the shots that I have seen with the lens have not blown me away. They are nice, but not so much nicer. This shot looks great on my screen. After your remark I looked at it on my iphone and tend to agree. It is over processed. Did you check out the rest of the shots posted on that site with the Sigma?
__________________
Isaac Grant
hosesbroadbill is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 5th December 2014, 22:01   #95
Stephen Mark
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: New Bern NC
Posts: 299
Just talked to a Sigma rep today at a demo day and the other version of the 150-600 (not the sport) is due to ship at least in limited quantities the first of February. He said they intend to ship both mounts not one and then the other.
Steve ( who isn't buying any more camera equipment till after Christmas anyway)
Stephen Mark is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 6th December 2014, 03:31   #96
hosesbroadbill
Registered User
 
hosesbroadbill's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Staten Island, NY
Posts: 436
comparisons

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Mark View Post
Just talked to a Sigma rep today at a demo day and the other version of the 150-600 (not the sport) is due to ship at least in limited quantities the first of February. He said they intend to ship both mounts not one and then the other.
Steve ( who isn't buying any more camera equipment till after Christmas anyway)
So has anyone, anywhere seen actual photos with this lens that make them think it is worth the extra money as compared to the Tamron? I know that I have read that it is sharper and seen some charts, but what about the pics? Any good direct comparisons from users who have both?
__________________
Isaac Grant
hosesbroadbill is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 6th December 2014, 03:38   #97
hosesbroadbill
Registered User
 
hosesbroadbill's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Staten Island, NY
Posts: 436
found this...

Quote:
Originally Posted by hosesbroadbill View Post
So has anyone, anywhere seen actual photos with this lens that make them think it is worth the extra money as compared to the Tamron? I know that I have read that it is sharper and seen some charts, but what about the pics? Any good direct comparisons from users who have both?
Not sure if this link has been shared. But here is at least a comparison. Different cameras and settings but at least the same targets at the same time.

http://www.kruger-2-kalahari.com/tam...a-150-600.html
__________________
Isaac Grant
hosesbroadbill is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 6th December 2014, 13:14   #98
Stephen Mark
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: New Bern NC
Posts: 299
Interesting! I think I can see slight differences in a couple of shots but with different settings it's hard to tell what makes the difference. Its like Alpha binoculars, I may think I see a slight difference but at what cost? The sigma at twice the money and two lbs more weight just doesn't trip my trigger but it seems that Tameron has tweaked their lens a little as the pictures appear better as time goes on. Oh well its just theory till after Dec 25th.
Steve
Stephen Mark is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 6th December 2014, 18:16   #99
the black fox
Registered User
 
the black fox's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: flint
Posts: 616
had a play with one today at a large photo shop based show in north wales today ,and having used the tamron i can only say this lens leaves it standing in the dust ,i used it in really poor light in a narrow back alley type street .and even got a fair amount of lock on's of flying seagulls that appeared and disappeared as they flew overhead .done a mini review on flickr for now link here

https://www.flickr.com/photos/31671466@N07/15959438662/

the proof is in the pudding 1/200th sec hand held with nearly 3 k.g of lens that around 6lbs in weight to the yanks
__________________
see more of my wildlife photos @ http://www.flickr.com/photos/31671466@N07/
the black fox is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 7th December 2014, 03:29   #100
hosesbroadbill
Registered User
 
hosesbroadbill's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Staten Island, NY
Posts: 436
vs Tamron

Quote:
Originally Posted by the black fox View Post
had a play with one today at a large photo shop based show in north wales today ,and having used the tamron i can only say this lens leaves it standing in the dust ,i used it in really poor light in a narrow back alley type street .and even got a fair amount of lock on's of flying seagulls that appeared and disappeared as they flew overhead .done a mini review on flickr for now link here

https://www.flickr.com/photos/31671466@N07/15959438662/

the proof is in the pudding 1/200th sec hand held with nearly 3 k.g of lens that around 6lbs in weight to the yanks
I guess I need to just order one and get it in my hands and then decide for myself. I am still not overly impressed with any of the shots I have seen with the Sigma (especially since I got my new monitor!). Just as an aside, I recently purchased and have been playing around with another Sigma lens, the 50mm Art that I am using to take pics of the family with. It is fantastic. Extremely well built and crazy sharp. I am sure their rendition of the 150-600mm will be as well. But at twice the price and a third more weight it will have to be a significant improvement to be worth it.
__________________
Isaac Grant
hosesbroadbill is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sigma 1.4 DG Tele-converter on Sigma 150-500 OS Lens. WHIMBREL Sigma & Other Third Party Lenses 2 Friday 6th March 2009 16:14

{googleads}
£100 Cashback on Opticron DBA VHD Binoculars. Click to find out more.

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.25102592 seconds with 35 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 00:07.