Earnest lad
Well-known member
Please may I request advice. For the past 3 years I have used for my birding the Sigma above. Relatively speaking, the Sigma 150-600 C is, I understand, somewhat of a "budget lens". The camera is a Nikon D7100. This is my first lens and my first DSLR camera.
I have learned a prime lens is better but far more expensive. I read the 500mm Nikon PF above, is good. Presumably better images would be attainable for me with the latter than my existing set up. I do understand they are more expensive than the Sigma but still potentially within financial reach.
Please can anyone advise as to whether I would likely be able to shoot significantly better quality images with the Nikon 500mm PF lens than I currently do with my Sigma, or, would it just be a marginal improvement on the existing lens.
I have learned a prime lens is better but far more expensive. I read the 500mm Nikon PF above, is good. Presumably better images would be attainable for me with the latter than my existing set up. I do understand they are more expensive than the Sigma but still potentially within financial reach.
Please can anyone advise as to whether I would likely be able to shoot significantly better quality images with the Nikon 500mm PF lens than I currently do with my Sigma, or, would it just be a marginal improvement on the existing lens.
Last edited: