Bigma Vs Sigma 70-200 USM 2.8 Vs Sigma 135-400mm

jjdgti · 01-21-2013, 07:23 PM

I am in a little dilemma:

I have this three lenses, however, I can not afford/need all of them.

Here it is my opinion and inclination to keep it or not:

Sigma APO DG 50-500mm

PRO:
I love this lens.
Extended focal length.
One lens does it all for long distance shots as well as some close one.

CON:
Heavy.
Expensive.
Not easy to carry.

Sigma EX DG 70-200mm 2.8 USM + Kenko MC7 2X teleconnveter

PRO:
Quiet operation.
Very fast lens even after the tele it is good at 400mm
Excellent IQ.

CON:
Heavy.
Expensive
Not easy to carry.

Sigma 135-400mm

PRO:
Easy to carry.
Nice focal range.
Inexpensive

CON:
Not as good as the other two
Not as fast as the 70-200mm
No low end focal length

I use the lenses in the 300mm+ only 10% of the time.

My inclination is to sell the Bigma and the 135-400mm and keep the 70-200 2.8 lens. This way I have a fast telephoto and a decent long lens with the help of the tele-converter.
With the proceeds I can get another lenses I need (to be honest I want

).

Does any of you had this similar lenses or experimented with some of them and what was your decision?

Thanks in advance for your opinion or comment.

GaryH · 01-21-2013, 08:05 PM

I would sell the 135-400mm. Had it and did not like its IQ.
IMHO, the bigma and 70-200 have diferent uses. I have had two iterations of the bigma and currently have the latest one with OS. It is a fine lens and I enjoy using it for wildlife almost exclusively. I found the 70- 200 a little short for wildlife but immensely useful in lower light situations and kids sports at night. Both are very fine lenses for their intended uses.

VisualDarkness · 01-21-2013, 08:18 PM

Yeah, the 135-400 is the odd man out to start with. Get rid of it and re-evaluate after that.

stormtech · 01-21-2013, 09:05 PM

I think a lot depends on how much money you are trying to free up, and if you want to keep just one of the lenses on your list or two. Also the key to this is that you say you shoot 300mm+ only 10% of the time.

If you were to keep 2 lenses, I would say to sell the Sigma 135-400 - but this will free up the least amount of money.

If you were to keep only one lens then it really comes down to how much money you are trying to recover. The Sigma 50-500 is the most versatile, but the most expensive of the three. The Sigma 70-200 is a lot faster.

At the end of the day if I were only going to keep one lens, it would be the Sigma 70-200 mostly because it is a much faster lens than the 50-500 and you say you don't shoot much at 300mm+.

gooseta · 01-22-2013, 04:48 AM

You could get rid of the 135-400 and the 70-200 and pick up a Tamron 70-200f2.8, it's cheaper, and from my experience and reviews is as sharp or sharper than the sigma, and is very good at the long end too. Also if you replace the 50-500 with the 150-500 you would lose some weight and it's less money, and has better iq

stormtech · 01-22-2013, 07:07 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by gooseta

Also if you replace the 50-500 with the 150-500 you would lose some weight and it's less money, and has better iq

Huh - now that is the first time I've heard that..........

**Lowell Goudge** · 01-22-2013, 07:37 AM

I have an older Sigma APO 70-200F2.8 EX which I use with the sigma APO 2x TC and feel this is the best type of overall arrangement. While I have personally not used a bigma the reports are that it gets a little soft at 500mm where as the early 70-200 is very sharp at maximum focal length even wide open.

I have posted many shots with this pair, and the advantage over the bigma is that if you take the TC off you have a much faster lens in the 70-200 range,

As for weight, sure it is a little heavy, at about 1.7 kilos, compared to 1KG for my K300/4 but for the versatility of the zoom, the weight is worth it

jjdgti · 01-22-2013, 11:21 AM

Thanks everyone for your inputs.
I am only looking to keep one lens.
I will post the others in the Marketplace for sale once I make the decision.

VisualDarkness · 01-22-2013, 12:02 PM

I woulds say keep the 70-200 as it's much easier to shoot with in general and actually useful under less than perfect lighting. You can always crop to a degree or get a teleconverter in the future.

ElJamoquio · 01-22-2013, 12:13 PM

Originally posted by stormtech

Huh - now that is the first time I've heard that..........

It's my experience as well, I thought I was an aberration.

01-21-2013, 07:23 PM	#1
jjdgti Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: NJ Posts: 1,824	Bigma Vs Sigma 70-200 USM 2.8 Vs Sigma 135-400mm I am in a little dilemma: I have this three lenses, however, I can not afford/need all of them. Here it is my opinion and inclination to keep it or not: Sigma APO DG 50-500mm PRO: I love this lens. Extended focal length. One lens does it all for long distance shots as well as some close one. CON: Heavy. Expensive. Not easy to carry. Sigma EX DG 70-200mm 2.8 USM + Kenko MC7 2X teleconnveter PRO: Quiet operation. Very fast lens even after the tele it is good at 400mm Excellent IQ. CON: Heavy. Expensive Not easy to carry. Sigma 135-400mm PRO: Easy to carry. Nice focal range. Inexpensive CON: Not as good as the other two Not as fast as the 70-200mm No low end focal length I use the lenses in the 300mm+ only 10% of the time. My inclination is to sell the Bigma and the 135-400mm and keep the 70-200 2.8 lens. This way I have a fast telephoto and a decent long lens with the help of the tele-converter. With the proceeds I can get another lenses I need (to be honest I want ). Does any of you had this similar lenses or experimented with some of them and what was your decision? Thanks in advance for your opinion or comment.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-5 with Sigma 17-70 vs 17-50 vs Pentax 18-135 vs Sigma 18-250	dr_romix	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	20	08-25-2012 07:19 AM
DA* 200 mm vs. Tamron/Sigma 70-200 f2.8	yorik	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	08-21-2012 03:50 PM
Sigma 70-200 2.8 HSM II vs OS	PhilV	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	10	06-30-2012 04:31 AM
Sigma 70-200 2.8 w 2x telecov vs. Sigma 50-500	mattipuh	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	04-20-2012 10:02 PM
DA*50-135 vs Sigma 70-200/2.8 (non HSM)?	axl	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	10-03-2009 08:18 AM

01-21-2013, 08:05 PM	#2
GaryH Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Philadelphia, Pa Photos: Gallery Posts: 764	I would sell the 135-400mm. Had it and did not like its IQ. IMHO, the bigma and 70-200 have diferent uses. I have had two iterations of the bigma and currently have the latest one with OS. It is a fine lens and I enjoy using it for wildlife almost exclusively. I found the 70- 200 a little short for wildlife but immensely useful in lower light situations and kids sports at night. Both are very fine lenses for their intended uses.

01-21-2013, 08:18 PM	#3
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Yeah, the 135-400 is the odd man out to start with. Get rid of it and re-evaluate after that.

01-21-2013, 09:05 PM	#4
stormtech Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: In the boonies (NW Penna) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,744	I think a lot depends on how much money you are trying to free up, and if you want to keep just one of the lenses on your list or two. Also the key to this is that you say you shoot 300mm+ only 10% of the time. If you were to keep 2 lenses, I would say to sell the Sigma 135-400 - but this will free up the least amount of money. If you were to keep only one lens then it really comes down to how much money you are trying to recover. The Sigma 50-500 is the most versatile, but the most expensive of the three. The Sigma 70-200 is a lot faster. At the end of the day if I were only going to keep one lens, it would be the Sigma 70-200 mostly because it is a much faster lens than the 50-500 and you say you don't shoot much at 300mm+.

01-22-2013, 04:48 AM	#5
gooseta Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: London Posts: 157	You could get rid of the 135-400 and the 70-200 and pick up a Tamron 70-200f2.8, it's cheaper, and from my experience and reviews is as sharp or sharper than the sigma, and is very good at the long end too. Also if you replace the 50-500 with the 150-500 you would lose some weight and it's less money, and has better iq

01-22-2013, 07:07 AM - 1 Like	#6
stormtech Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: In the boonies (NW Penna) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,744	Originally posted by gooseta Also if you replace the 50-500 with the 150-500 you would lose some weight and it's less money, and has better iq Huh - now that is the first time I've heard that..........

01-22-2013, 07:37 AM	#7
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,891	I have an older Sigma APO 70-200F2.8 EX which I use with the sigma APO 2x TC and feel this is the best type of overall arrangement. While I have personally not used a bigma the reports are that it gets a little soft at 500mm where as the early 70-200 is very sharp at maximum focal length even wide open. I have posted many shots with this pair, and the advantage over the bigma is that if you take the TC off you have a much faster lens in the 70-200 range, As for weight, sure it is a little heavy, at about 1.7 kilos, compared to 1KG for my K300/4 but for the versatility of the zoom, the weight is worth it

01-22-2013, 11:21 AM	#8
jjdgti Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: NJ Posts: 1,824 Original Poster	Thanks everyone for your inputs. I am only looking to keep one lens. I will post the others in the Marketplace for sale once I make the decision.

01-22-2013, 12:02 PM	#9
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	I woulds say keep the 70-200 as it's much easier to shoot with in general and actually useful under less than perfect lighting. You can always crop to a degree or get a teleconverter in the future.

01-22-2013, 12:13 PM	#10
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by stormtech Huh - now that is the first time I've heard that.......... It's my experience as well, I thought I was an aberration.