Sigma 135-400 or 170-500

GLThorne · 02-22-2007, 11:25 AM

Hello All! I've searched for both of these here, and didn't come up with much. Both of these look to be very good lenses and will probably be one of my next buys.

Thoughts on these?

joele · 02-22-2007, 04:43 PM

From all reports I have seen the 135-400 is sharper (get the DG version) and obviously smaller.. But it also depends I guess if you need the extra length of the 500mm?

My 135-400 worked very well at the long end, but tended to BackFocus from 135mm to about 230mm...

HawaiianOnline · 02-23-2007, 12:51 AM

Here's some reviews from Fredmiranda.com on the 135-400.

As for the 170-500, it's kind of soft at the long end. I have had this lens since last year when I bought it used from KEH for about $350. If your subject is going to fill the frame, it works fine. But if you do a 100% crop, the softness becomes noticeable. That said, I have gotten acceptably sharp shots with this and my K10D as long as I was using a monopod or my tripod. If you are considering this lens, I would recommend saving up a bit more and go for the Sigma 50-500. If I were considering buying both lenses band new, I would go for the 50-500 for sure. The 170-500 was a great buy at $350, but not at the $669 at some places.

02-22-2007, 11:25 AM	#1
GLThorne Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA - South Carolina Photos: Gallery Posts: 372	Sigma 135-400 or 170-500 Hello All! I've searched for both of these here, and didn't come up with much. Both of these look to be very good lenses and will probably be one of my next buys. Thoughts on these?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-5 and Sigma 170-500	apac	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	7	08-31-2011 05:01 PM
Nature Sigma 170-500 closeup lens	crewl1	Post Your Photos!	5	07-12-2011 10:56 AM
Sigma 170-500+1.4X Tamron TC	john1938	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	05-18-2011 10:22 AM
Sigma 50-500 vs 150-500 vs 170-500	juanraortiz	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	10-30-2009 03:32 PM
SIGMA 135-400 or 170-500?	bonovox	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	10-21-2007 06:26 PM

02-22-2007, 04:43 PM	#2
joele Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,308	From all reports I have seen the 135-400 is sharper (get the DG version) and obviously smaller.. But it also depends I guess if you need the extra length of the 500mm? My 135-400 worked very well at the long end, but tended to BackFocus from 135mm to about 230mm...

02-23-2007, 12:51 AM	#3
HawaiianOnline Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Hawaii Posts: 613	Here's some reviews from Fredmiranda.com on the 135-400. As for the 170-500, it's kind of soft at the long end. I have had this lens since last year when I bought it used from KEH for about $350. If your subject is going to fill the frame, it works fine. But if you do a 100% crop, the softness becomes noticeable. That said, I have gotten acceptably sharp shots with this and my K10D as long as I was using a monopod or my tripod. If you are considering this lens, I would recommend saving up a bit more and go for the Sigma 50-500. If I were considering buying both lenses band new, I would go for the 50-500 for sure. The 170-500 was a great buy at $350, but not at the $669 at some places.