Sigma 50-500 vs Sigma 150-500

slackercruster · 04-09-2012, 03:49 PM

Not many reviews for the 50-500. OK, it has a wider zoom range. How is the sharpness compared to the 150-500? Which lens do you prefer?

Thanks

GaryH · 04-09-2012, 03:55 PM

if you are looking at the OS version of the 50-500mm, I would say that is quite a bit better than the 150-500. I had the older EX model than sold it to buy the new one. It is an excellent lens within its limitations of being slower. OS is very nice to have and works well. Sigma has made a nice improvement in image quality over the previous version.

slackercruster · 04-09-2012, 03:58 PM

No, OS is not a factor. Just sharpness and IQ.

GaryH · 04-09-2012, 04:51 PM

I am much happier with the sharpness of the new version of the 50-500mm.
Check this out. He uses the 50-500mm and has some amazing shots with it. If you are wanting better IQ than the two lenses mentioned, then a manual focus older lens or expensive autofocus prime

panoguy · 04-09-2012, 04:57 PM

Originally posted by slackercruster

Not many reviews for the 50-500.

Maybe not on this site, but look around the web at Canikon versions, and you will find lots of reviews. Search for "Bigma" and "BigmOS" as well, which are the gearhead slang terms for that lens. And as GaryH tried to point out, the latest version has been optically improved, so the "OS" term does mean something more than optical stabilization.

So I have the 150-500, which I am very happy with, but have never compared it directly to the 50-500. What I've read is that the 50-500 has an edge in sharpness and IQ (which is saying something, considering it's a 10x zoom), but the 150-500 satisfies me in those areas and I don't really need the extra low range. Actually, I briefly borrowed a Sigma 500mm f/4.5 prime (beast) and have found the 150-500 @500mm to be just as sharp at f/8 (of course the beast can go down to 4.5... but costs $5k!).

Originally posted by GaryH

Check this out. He uses the 50-500mm and has some amazing shots with it.

Yep, Ogun Turkay is a great example of using the gear well...

slackercruster · 04-09-2012, 05:43 PM

Originally posted by GaryH

I am much happier with the sharpness of the new version of the 50-500mm.
Check this out. He uses the 50-500mm and has some amazing shots with it. If you are wanting better IQ than the two lenses mentioned, then a manual focus older lens or expensive autofocus prime

Yes, impressive sharp photos.

Philoslothical · 04-09-2012, 05:56 PM

I'd be interested to know where the 170-500 fits in with the other two, as well, in terms of IQ and sharpness.

joe.penn · 04-09-2012, 05:59 PM

If I would opt for any of the 500 zooms, it would be the 50-500 OS - so far with my 70-200 OS I have seen a really good improvement using the OS of the lens vs the in body SR on the 200mm end; I can imagine this would come in extremely handy for handheld shots on the mid to long end of the lens...

MegaPower · 04-09-2012, 06:17 PM

I heard the 150-500 is not very good @450-500.
How is it on the 50-500OS @450-500?

panoguy · 04-10-2012, 05:33 AM

Originally posted by MegaPower

I heard the 150-500 is not very good @450-500.

Well, I can dispute that!

The 150-500 isn't great on the 150-200mm end (any 70-200 would be better), but from 300-500 it is very sharp... and easily hand-holdable with the OS.

(You might be thinking of the 120-400, which I found to be the reverse - not bad at 120mm, but mushy at 400mm.)

04-09-2012, 03:49 PM	#1
slackercruster Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: NE, USA Posts: 1,302	Sigma 50-500 vs Sigma 150-500 Not many reviews for the 50-500. OK, it has a wider zoom range. How is the sharpness compared to the 150-500? Which lens do you prefer? Thanks

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Sigma 150-500 HSM	AGWoodard	Sold Items	8	10-16-2011 02:51 PM
IQ for 150-500, 50-500, 120-400 Sigma's?	saladin	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	07-30-2011 04:57 PM
Sigma 50-500 vs 150-500 vs 170-500	juanraortiz	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	10-30-2009 03:32 PM
Sigma lenses 150-500, 50-500 ?	lesmore49	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	03-21-2009 06:49 AM

04-09-2012, 03:55 PM	#2
GaryH Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Philadelphia, Pa Photos: Gallery Posts: 764	if you are looking at the OS version of the 50-500mm, I would say that is quite a bit better than the 150-500. I had the older EX model than sold it to buy the new one. It is an excellent lens within its limitations of being slower. OS is very nice to have and works well. Sigma has made a nice improvement in image quality over the previous version.

04-09-2012, 03:58 PM	#3
slackercruster Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: NE, USA Posts: 1,302 Original Poster	No, OS is not a factor. Just sharpness and IQ.

04-09-2012, 04:51 PM	#4
GaryH Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Philadelphia, Pa Photos: Gallery Posts: 764	I am much happier with the sharpness of the new version of the 50-500mm. Check this out. He uses the 50-500mm and has some amazing shots with it. If you are wanting better IQ than the two lenses mentioned, then a manual focus older lens or expensive autofocus prime

04-09-2012, 04:57 PM	#5
panoguy Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Washington, D.C. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,327	Originally posted by slackercruster Not many reviews for the 50-500. Maybe not on this site, but look around the web at Canikon versions, and you will find lots of reviews. Search for "Bigma" and "BigmOS" as well, which are the gearhead slang terms for that lens. And as GaryH tried to point out, the latest version has been optically improved, so the "OS" term does mean something more than optical stabilization. So I have the 150-500, which I am very happy with, but have never compared it directly to the 50-500. What I've read is that the 50-500 has an edge in sharpness and IQ (which is saying something, considering it's a 10x zoom), but the 150-500 satisfies me in those areas and I don't really need the extra low range. Actually, I briefly borrowed a Sigma 500mm f/4.5 prime (beast) and have found the 150-500 @500mm to be just as sharp at f/8 (of course the beast can go down to 4.5... but costs $5k!). Originally posted by GaryH Check this out. He uses the 50-500mm and has some amazing shots with it. Yep, Ogun Turkay is a great example of using the gear well...

04-09-2012, 05:43 PM	#6
slackercruster Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: NE, USA Posts: 1,302 Original Poster	Originally posted by GaryH I am much happier with the sharpness of the new version of the 50-500mm. Check this out. He uses the 50-500mm and has some amazing shots with it. If you are wanting better IQ than the two lenses mentioned, then a manual focus older lens or expensive autofocus prime Yes, impressive sharp photos.

04-09-2012, 05:56 PM	#7
Philoslothical Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 1,889	I'd be interested to know where the 170-500 fits in with the other two, as well, in terms of IQ and sharpness.

04-09-2012, 05:59 PM	#8
joe.penn Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Maryland (Right Outside Washington DC) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,902	If I would opt for any of the 500 zooms, it would be the 50-500 OS - so far with my 70-200 OS I have seen a really good improvement using the OS of the lens vs the in body SR on the 200mm end; I can imagine this would come in extremely handy for handheld shots on the mid to long end of the lens...

04-09-2012, 06:17 PM	#9
MegaPower Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Hong Kong / Irvine, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 636	I heard the 150-500 is not very good @450-500. How is it on the 50-500OS @450-500?

04-10-2012, 05:33 AM	#10
panoguy Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Washington, D.C. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,327	Originally posted by MegaPower I heard the 150-500 is not very good @450-500. Well, I can dispute that! The 150-500 isn't great on the 150-200mm end (any 70-200 would be better), but from 300-500 it is very sharp... and easily hand-holdable with the OS. (You might be thinking of the 120-400, which I found to be the reverse - not bad at 120mm, but mushy at 400mm.)