• 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.

New Sigma 150/600 (1 Viewer)

jimthomson

Well-known member
So because he has owned multiple lenses he therefore never takes shots that suffer from motion blur? Is that really what you think? Owned longer = none of your shots suffer from motion blur. I freely admit that a large number of my shots suffer from motion blur when trying to shoot small fast moving birds, but I guess he is perfect and rock solid on every shot. Makes sense. :t:

Once again, another finger pointing post that has nothing to do with a lens. There really is little to nothing of value to be gotten here unless you like finger pointing and defending soft images. And clearly we have different ideas of what sharp means when it comes to a photo.

No, owned longer simply means that you were not, as you claimed, one of the first to own the lens. You got one of the second batch shipped, just like I did.

Micloi was one of the first to own the lens just like he is with the Sigma 150-600.

Both micloi and I have as much or more experience as you with long zoom lenses and we don't see the motion blur you are claiming in the picture.

You really need to get over this my pictures are sharper than your pictures attitude. Sharpness can be over-rated.
 

hosesbroadbill

Well-known member
No, owned longer simply means that you were not, as you claimed, one of the first to own the lens. You got one of the second batch shipped, just like I did.

Micloi was one of the first to own the lens just like he is with the Sigma 150-600.

Both micloi and I have as much or more experience as you with long zoom lenses and we don't see the motion blur you are claiming in the picture.

You really need to get over this my pictures are sharper than your pictures attitude. Sharpness can be over-rated.

Guess we will have to agree to disagree on this. This contributes nothing to anyone else reading this forum and being interested in this lens. If you are happy with the image quality in his pics than I am happy for you. I am not and that should be OK as well.

I've had a look at your flickr page. Clearly we have different standards when it comes to picture quality. And that too is OK.
 

Doc63

Well-known member
At the risk of stepping into a bit of a minefield, wasn't the Sigma Contemporary lens aimed at competing with the Tamron, not the Sigma Sport? Not exactly comparing apples with apples at the minute.
 

bcl05

Well-known member
The pettiness and sniping on this board about these lenses is really ridiculous.

Comparing one person's results with a lens with another's is foolish. There are just far too many variables. The only real way to do it would be to have the same person take the same picture with the same camera body with the two different lenses. And that would only tell you the difference between the two specific lenses in your hand. The sample-to-sample variation between individual lenses (of the same model) is not trivial.

If you like your lens and like the pictures you take with it, enjoy it. Most of us really enjoy seeing the pictures and hearing how your experience with each lens is. It is all very valuable for people like me who are just stepping into bird photography. Please stop with the personal bickering, though, it really detracts from the value of these forums.
 
Last edited:

tjsimonsen

Well-known member
The pettiness and sniping on this board about these lenses is really ridiculous.

Comparing one person's results with a lens with another's is foolish. There are just far too many variables. The only real way to do it would be to have the same person take the same picture with the same camera body with the two different lenses. And that would only telly you the difference between the two specific lenses in your hand. The sample-to-sample variation between individual lenses (of the same model) is not trivial.

If you like your lens and like the pictures you take with it, enjoy it. Most of us really enjoy seeing the pictures and hearing how your experience with each lens is. It is all very valuable for people like me who are just stepping into bird photography. Please stop with the personal bickering, though, it really detracts from the value of these forums.

Well Said!

Thomas
 

hosesbroadbill

Well-known member
At the risk of stepping into a bit of a minefield, wasn't the Sigma Contemporary lens aimed at competing with the Tamron, not the Sigma Sport? Not exactly comparing apples with apples at the minute.

Yes the Sport is supposed to be in a different class, both optically and in weather sealing. So why are the limited samples produced so far with this lens not in a different class?
 

hosesbroadbill

Well-known member
The pettiness and sniping on this board about these lenses is really ridiculous.

Comparing one person's results with a lens with another's is foolish. There are just far too many variables. The only real way to do it would be to have the same person take the same picture with the same camera body with the two different lenses. And that would only tell you the difference between the two specific lenses in your hand. The sample-to-sample variation between individual lenses (of the same model) is not trivial.

If you like your lens and like the pictures you take with it, enjoy it. Most of us really enjoy seeing the pictures and hearing how your experience with each lens is. It is all very valuable for people like me who are just stepping into bird photography. Please stop with the personal bickering, though, it really detracts from the value of these forums.

Could not agree more about the bickering.

Don't agree about the results. You have to base the results off of something. Unless many more than one of us (to account for lens variation) are doing direct comparisons with the same camera and the same light then what we have to go off of is the evidence on this forum, flickr, juza and other sites. Spending $2,000 on a lens is quite a big deal for some (like those who have already mentioned they are on a fixed pension) and I think what many of us are looking for are good, consistent photos that have better color, sharpness and clarity then the Tamron or 400 5.6, or the new 100-400 or any other equivalent Nikon/Sony lenses. That certainly has not been the case so far.

And while I am happy wtih the Tamron, that does not mean that it there are not better options out there. How about the same sharpness at f6.3 so the lens will perform better in lower light situations? How about sharper images at 6000mm? How about better weather sealing? Hoping I get these with the Sigma...
 
Last edited:

the black fox

Well-known member
my predictions for 2015 .

isaac will buy a sigma 150-600 sport as he knows its better

mic will buy and test a sigma 150-600 C and also find it good

i might win the lottery and buy one to

the bickering on this thread will continue till new years eve 2016

some of us might go out and take some SHARP photos .

happy daze folks .
 

Paul - Herts

Paul Herts
Been told February but would take that with a pinch of salt.

Thanks for the info. I'm hoping it will provide Tamron like performance with an improved image stabiliser and a comparable price. I can't understand why Tamron's design doesn't allow for panning. I know people with better technique say it's not needed but I would like the option available.

Failing that I think the Tamron will be the way forward for me because of the price and weight differences.

And the longer I hold off the greater the chance that I can keep my 400 too
 

hosesbroadbill

Well-known member
my predictions for 2015 .

isaac will buy a sigma 150-600 sport as he knows its better

mic will buy and test a sigma 150-600 C and also find it good

i might win the lottery and buy one to

the bickering on this thread will continue till new years eve 2016

some of us might go out and take some SHARP photos .

happy daze folks .

Very funny. I swear I was laughing for a long time.

I have a question that is not Sigma related but certainly relates to the options. With any camera that can autofocus at f8 I have read that it is center point only. Does that mean that there is only 1 point that it will work in? Is it just the center zone and any points in that zone or what? The 100-400ii is in stock at B&H and I would buy it but if I can only use 1 point than I am not interested.

Also just as a comparison (I know they were not taken in the same time, place, light, camera, photographer, etc.) but this is interesting.

A photo I have posted already from juza (not mine) with Sigma

http://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php?t=1121799&l=en

And a very similar photo from flickr (not mine) of the same bird with Tamron

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/15989736299/in/[email protected]

Thoughts?
 

micloi

Well-known member
Same photos resized and sharpened a little more. This is how some people post higher ISO shots:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/5efrpqx3hc7u5do/AAAtbmNg73F8-QO7EKxI1rPKa?dl=0

And I was not even that close to the birds.
At half the distance, ISO400 or lower and f8 or f9 these would be even sharper.

For reference this is the full frame of the Robin:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/at7gbdsb47x44nw/robin full frame.jpg?dl=0

And the woodpecker with the D7100 and Tamron 150-600mm

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5kt8m60czqy1194/Tamron 150-600 and D7100.jpg?dl=0

Also the Robin with the same combo:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ih3tpb2bkvpgg3u/Tamron 150-600 and D7100 b.jpg?dl=0

The D810 exhibits, as expected, less noise. The Tamron is ok open wide but much better at f8
 
Last edited:

njlarsen

Well-known member
Opus Editor
Both are good, Juza's possibly a little better. Distance is the biggest unknown here.

Niels

My post was in response to Isaac's
 
Last edited:

hosesbroadbill

Well-known member
Same photos resized and sharpened a little more. This is how some people post higher ISO shots:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/5efrpqx3hc7u5do/AAAtbmNg73F8-QO7EKxI1rPKa?dl=0

And I was not even that close to the birds.
At half the distance, ISO400 or lower and f8 or f9 these would be even sharper.

For reference this is the full frame of the Robin:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/at7gbdsb47x44nw/robin full frame.jpg?dl=0

And the woodpecker with the D7100 and Tamron 150-600mm

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5kt8m60czqy1194/Tamron 150-600 and D7100.jpg?dl=0

Also the Robin with the same combo:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ih3tpb2bkvpgg3u/Tamron 150-600 and D7100 b.jpg?dl=0

The D810 exhibits, as expected, less noise. The Tamron is ok open wide but much better at f8

Difference between the Sigma and Tamron is striking with the Sigma being much better, sharper, better color and contrast. As I do not know either camera, how would the results have differed if the Tamron was shot with the d810? Also was the Tamron shot at f6.3 or f8?
 

micloi

Well-known member
Difference between the Sigma and Tamron is striking with the Sigma being much better, sharper, better color and contrast. As I do not know either camera, how would the results have differed if the Tamron was shot with the d810? Also was the Tamron shot at f6.3 or f8?

The sharpness would not be greatly affected if noise reduction not was used but the noise would be greater.

The Tamron shot at f8 on the D810 would be about the same as the Sigma on the same camera at f6.3 from my current experience.
It is a shame I do not have 2 full frame cameras to do more tests of the same bird, they never stick around long enough for me to swap cameras ...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top