Sigma HSM vs Nikon AFS

[vettenut]

One of the dream lenses on my list is the Nikon 200-400VR AFS but the cost which was way up there to begin with is now in the $5,800-6,300 price range which is beyond my will to spend. I was considering either the Sigma 50-500 or 150-500 instead but am curious as to how fast the focusing is with HSM vs the Nikon AFS.

The reason for the purchase is for wildlife and I'm leaning in the 150-500 direction for a cost of < $1,000.00 but if it can't focus fast enough to capture birds in flight then it is not going to meet my needs.

Anyone have experience with the Sigma Zooms, I have the 10-20mm Sigma and luv it and had a macro lens years ago for my minolta body that worked well but I am not familiar with the zooms. Any help/comments would be appreciated. - Jeff

 

[ccasey]

This may not be the best option but I'll chime in. I picked up a used Sigma 70-200 w/ 1.4x TC a few weeks ago for $600. Today the 2x TC arrived (used for $150). So with the 2x, I'm shooting a 140-400 f/5.6 lens. Here's a sample wide open, and then one a stop down.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Focus in both is on the eye on camera right. Both were shot with flash bounced off the wall to camera left, and both shots were shot RAW and processed with default sharpening in ACR. USM was added in Photoshop (150%, 1.5, 5).

I haven't had it outside yet, but in mediocre indoor light, focus speed didn't seem to be affected - that is, it focused as quickly as the 70-200 normally does (nice and fast). I don't expect it to have any problem keeping up with kids or birds.

I'm very happy with my 70-200 but I know there are others that have not been as lucky. For your budget I think it's a great fit.

-Chris

EDIT: Both TC's are Sigma.

 

[JohnK]

HSM seems fairly fast, it's fast enough to capture eagles in flight. Swallows zipping above the pond are a different story (at least when I try to get them).

Here is a thread with some eagles in flight I caught with my D80/150-500, I wouldn't be surprised if your D300 did better. https://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=181481

 

[kiwi]

I think re AF speed they are pretty close.

 

[fmphoto]

The HSM, although not as fast as AFS, is plenty fast enough and the quality of Sigma has improved dramatically.

 

[pforsell]

The HSM, although not as fast as AFS, is plenty fast enough ...

That depends on the lens in question. Sigma 70-200 focuses faster than Nikkor 70-200 VR.

 

[Randy]

That depends on the lens in question. Sigma 70-200 focuses faster than Nikkor 70-200 VR.

maybe yours does:smile:
lol & absurd

 

[Sir Dave of Wessex]

I agree it's pointless comparing brand to brand. You need to compare directly competing models if the ultimate nono-second of HSM/AFS is what is gonna make the decision on a purchase. I've owned the 50-500 and 150-500 and both great lenses for the money ... but they don't compete with the stuff costing 4-6 times the price. I hire the latter for when I need them, which is really about twice a year on big trips. But also true that shooting a few stops down and for display on the web you won't IMO see much difference in IQ unless you have very specific commercial/artistic needs. Again, depends what kinda birds in flight - a small Finch whizzing from bush to bush is very different to a Vulture gliding down to lunch. You will get some shots with the more pricey gear you won't always get with the big Sigma's so it's a question of whether that counts enough to pay $4-5000 more. For me the 50-500 is a little faster in AF than the 150-500, but if I was investing I'd rather choose the latter for what/how I shoot due to IS. It's a bit of a bargain at its price point.

 

[vettenut]

Thanks for everyone's comments so far, as stated I was leaning the 150-500 direction due to optical stabilization being available in that lens vs. the 50-500. When you read reviews from people who have purchased these sigma lenses some claim AF is slow which is why I titled the post as such. Nikon prices seem to be going thru the roof although our foreign friends are probably saying "It's about time you blokes had to pay what we pay":smile:.

If any owners have more sample pics I would appreciate it. Thanks - Jeff

 

[colincarter]

That depends on the lens in question. Sigma 70-200 focuses faster than Nikkor 70-200 VR.

the Nikon 70-200 is alot faster than the Sigma, don't know where you are getting your information from.

 

[jonh68]

If you are going with Sigma, I think a better option would be the 100-300 f4 with a 1.4 TC over the 150-500. OS is not really that big of a need for wildlife because you need high frame rates. The 100-300 f4 is more pro grade than the 150-500 and not much more in price.

When light becomes a problem, you will have nice continuous f4 capabilities.

 

[jonh68]

the Nikon 70-200 is alot faster than the Sigma, don't know where you are getting your information from.

I wouldn't say its a lot faster, but the Nikon 70-200 is quicker and sharper than the Sigma. I would hope it would be since it's over $1000 more.

In regards to HSM vs AFS, its not a dramatic difference. Its not a difference like screw driven vs dedicated AFS is.