Sig's 150-500 OS HSM or 80-400 VR

Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
684
Location
Modesto, CA
I hope this isn't a repeat thread.

I would like to know if anyone here have any comparisons between these two lenses. I know the new Sig, now has OS and HSM... so that is really sweet. Of course we all know how the 80-400 behaves.

? is how is the IQ difference between the two...

thanks again Cafe brotherhood,
 
Joined
Mar 27, 2007
Messages
476
Location
Pawtucket, RI
Taken under stadium lights with the Sigma 150-500 HSM OS hand held

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


Need I say more??
 
Joined
Mar 27, 2007
Messages
476
Location
Pawtucket, RI
Thank for the compliment.

That was at 155mm but i have others just as sharp at 400 & 500. I find it to be a surprisingly sharp lens and the OS works great. I can handhold that lens and get a high ratio of keepers. Obviously, it's not a fast lens but on a D300 it would be if you shot at iso 3600. Lot of bang for the buck IMHO

Here's one at 500mm

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
684
Location
Modesto, CA
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #5
Those are suberb samples... my my my....

Again, anyone have any opinon of this lens (hasn't had a nickname yet) vs. the 80-400 VR.

I think the Bigma needs to retire and have that name transferred to the new bad boy in town. Possibly BigmOS? It does have OS you know...
 
Joined
Mar 27, 2007
Messages
476
Location
Pawtucket, RI
Thanks for your comments.

The interesting thing is that these were the first pictures taken with that lens, out of the box. I also have a Sigma 80-400 OS so I am familiar with the Sigma layout. This lens is only a few ounces heavier and longer when extended but it has great build quality, great IQ and I find it a bargain.
 
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,722
Location
Banff National Park, Alberta
I've seen enough examples that I know (or have a good idea) of what the 150-500 can do at 500mm, what I don't know is how well the OS works. I can shoot at 1/80 @ 400mm on my monopod and consistantly get sharp results with the 80-400. Could you do that @ 500mm with the 150-500?

edit: also how fast does it autofocus?
 
Joined
Mar 27, 2007
Messages
476
Location
Pawtucket, RI
The OS works great. 1/80 on a monopod should be no sweat. The focusing in good light is comparable, especially with the HSM, to the Nikkor 80-400. If I were making a choice I would try both lenses on the body I was planning to use unless that is not possible. I can tell you the build quality far surpasses the Nikkor.
 
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,722
Location
Banff National Park, Alberta
To me build quality is a huge sore spot on the 80-400. I've recently moved to banff and I've taken up hiking. The D200/80-400 is a constant companion on my travels. I refuse to stow my rig back into my backpack everytime it starts to drizzle a little bit as you never know when something might present itself. I'm not worried about the D200 but the 80-400 I worry about. It's disappointing to hear about the autofocus performance of the sigma. But what can you expect for around a $1000?
 
Joined
Mar 27, 2007
Messages
476
Location
Pawtucket, RI
I don't have an 80-400 Nikkor to compare it against. I find it quite adequate and the fact that I can manually focus it while the VR is active helps tremendously. If you're close to the focus point the AF is quick, as far as I'm concerned. I do find the lens built like a tank....it's a great lens for me.
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2007
Messages
361
Location
Atwater, California & Chiriqui, Panama
Just My own oppinion and mine only.... I am not impressed with the 150-500. Its the Nikkor all the way.
We must remember we get what we pay for. Nikon has been making lenses for over 100 years! They know what to do when it comes to glass. What they may not know is that many of us are looking for a Nikkor 135-500 AFS VR at $1800.:smile:
 
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
684
Location
Modesto, CA
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #13
Just My own oppinion and mine only.... I am not impressed with the 150-500. Its the Nikkor all the way.
We must remember we get what we pay for. Nikon has been making lenses for over 100 years! They know what to do when it comes to glass. What they may not know is that many of us are looking for a Nikkor 135-500 AFS VR at $1800.:smile:
Do you have any sample photos of the 80-400 @ 400?

love to see some BIF's @ 400mm with the nikkor,
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2007
Messages
361
Location
Atwater, California & Chiriqui, Panama
Here's one I stumbled across... taken with the 80-400 @400. Everything was in M mode with VR on, hand held... if I remember... settings...1/250 at f8. :biggrin:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
684
Location
Modesto, CA
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #15
Here's one I stumbled across... taken with the 80-400 @400. Everything was in M mode with VR on, hand held... if I remember... settings...1/250 at f8. :biggrin:

Do you have any BIF's? @400, I'd like to see some of dat.
 
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
42,642
Location
CHARLOTTE
Real Name
Randy
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
684
Location
Modesto, CA
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #17
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Messages
472
Location
Bozeman, MT
I don't have an 80-400 Nikkor to compare it against. I find it quite adequate and the fact that I can manually focus it while the VR is active helps tremendously. If you're close to the focus point the AF is quick, as far as I'm concerned. I do find the lens built like a tank....it's a great lens for me.
I just got my 150-500 in the mail yesterday. The jury is still out for me on the IQ. However, I'm really pleased with the OS and the AF, particularly compared to the Nikkor 80-400. To me the OS seems much quieter than the VR. The HSM is really quiet and pretty fast. Last night I took it to a pond and tried some bird in flight shots as the sun was setting. It definitely struggled. It was fine to good on perched birds.

My long lens technique is pretty bad, I suspect.

Here's a 1:1 of my daughter from her birthday party. That's at 500 f/8 1/400.

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


This is a larger crop of the same image.
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Here she is swinging. The AF seemed to do well. 380 @ f/8, 1/500.
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


My dad across the yard. 500 @ f/6.3 (wide open), 1/640.
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


I didn't sharpen these before I sent them to Picasa. Picasa does a pretty poor job of scaling them down, I think. They don't look as sharp in this post as they do normally.

In general, I'm not stoked about the image quality, but so far it's a fun toy.
 
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Messages
472
Location
Bozeman, MT
I shot some more birds this evening.
Exposure: 1/1000 sec
Aperture: f/8.0
Focal Length: 500mm
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Exposure: 1/125 sec
Aperture: f/9.0
Focal Length: 500mm
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom