Sigma 50-150 f2.8 vs. Sigma 70-200 f2.8

Hostis · 11-03-2014, 02:21 PM

Hi guys.

I got my self a Sigma 50-150 from ebay and got it shipped from Japan. I really love it. But would you think that the IQ is better on the 70-200? The 70-200 is ready to go with FF when that day comes.

Best regards.

redcat · 11-03-2014, 02:30 PM

they are two different lens with the range 70-150 overlap, I didn't use those before but the 70-200 receive a lot of recommendation in this forum, there is an in-depth review for that ^^

starjedi · 11-03-2014, 04:05 PM

Originally posted by Hostis

Hi guys.

I got my self a Sigma 50-150 from ebay and got it shipped from Japan. I really love it. But would you think that the IQ is better on the 70-200? The 70-200 is ready to go with FF when that day comes.

Best regards.

70-200 is a lens with good reputation across the different mount. But 50-150 is not bad also. Note one is ff-compatible and heavy, the latter is aps-c only and relative light. So it is not fair to compare those twos. Do not regret your purchase for not buying sigma 70-200. More importantly it will also give you reason to buy pentax comings 70-200! :-)

MadMathMind · 11-03-2014, 04:56 PM

The 70-200 is a great lens, but it is incredibly heavy. It's too heavy to carry around unless you are sure you going to use it. The 70-200 clocks in at over 1300g, depending on whether you get the OS version or the II (no OS, so lighter by about 100g). The 50-150 is about 800g, which is pretty comfortable to carry.

wed7 · 11-03-2014, 09:41 PM

The newer version of the 50-150 (not available in Pentax) is now as big (77mm) and as heavy as their 70-200 counterparts.

Hostis · 11-04-2014, 01:07 AM

Thx guys.

Perhaps better to wait for FF before I make any changes. I might keep the 50-150 with my K3 and 70-200 for the FF. The range of 50-150 with a aps-c is almost as 70-200 on FF.

If Pentax makes a 70-200 it would cost more than 2000$

And in Sweden it would get closer to 3000$

Na Horuk · 11-05-2014, 11:01 AM

You just got a lens, take your time to get to know it

No need to rush to the next big thing.
Also, I think that the difference between 50mm and 70mm is more significant than 150mm and 200mm, but this might depend on your needs. Some photographers need those extra 50mm on the long end, some need even more than that! I suggest you stick with your lens for a while, until your needs become more apparent. When you feel the lens is limiting you, preventing you from getting the shots you want, then it might be time to buy new gear.

Hostis · 11-06-2014, 10:59 AM

Originally posted by Na Horuk

You just got a lens, take your time to get to know it

No need to rush to the next big thing.
Also, I think that the difference between 50mm and 70mm is more significant than 150mm and 200mm, but this might depend on your needs. Some photographers need those extra 50mm on the long end, some need even more than that! I suggest you stick with your lens for a while, until your needs become more apparent. When you feel the lens is limiting you, preventing you from getting the shots you want, then it might be time to buy new gear.

Yeah, you're right!

The thing is.
I can sell my lens and buy a 70-200 without losing any money pretty much..
But i guess, the 20mm on the short end is what i really need.

The perfect lens for me would be a 10-300mm at f2.8

**crewl1** · 11-06-2014, 11:18 AM

Originally posted by Hostis

Yeah, you're right!

The thing is.
I can sell my lens and buy a 70-200 without losing any money pretty much..
But i guess, the 20mm on the short end is what i really need.

The perfect lens for me would be a 10-300mm at f2.8

That would be a monster lens!

The Sigma 70-200 OS is a fine lens and it is hand holdable IMO, as I use it quite a bit, but some don't like the weight.

I recently acquired a DA*50-135 which I believe is similar in size and weight to your 50-150. It is much easier to carry and shift around for fast moving shots, and the IQ is wonderful.

Depending on your intended use it would dictate whether you want to move to the 70-200 or not. Do you need the long end or is 150 enough and the wider 50mm side is more important?

redcat · 11-07-2014, 06:25 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Hostis

The perfect lens for me would be a 10-300mm at f2.8

well, and if it's a pancake lens, that would be my purchase for sure =))

11-03-2014, 02:21 PM	#1
Hostis New Member Join Date: Mar 2014 Posts: 6	Sigma 50-150 f2.8 vs. Sigma 70-200 f2.8 Hi guys. I got my self a Sigma 50-150 from ebay and got it shipped from Japan. I really love it. But would you think that the IQ is better on the 70-200? The 70-200 is ready to go with FF when that day comes. Best regards.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Tamron 70-200 F2.8 vs Sigma 70-200 F2.8 EX DG HSM II - Battle of the older telephotos	JinDesu	Pentax Lens Articles	45	11-03-2014 06:30 AM
For Sale - Sold: Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4 & Sigma 50-200 F4-5.6 Lenses	Vantage-Point	Sold Items	3	10-29-2013 08:52 AM
Wanted - Acquired: 50-135 f2.8 / 70-200 f2.8 / 50-150 f2.8 under $700	Quazimoto	Sold Items	3	01-24-2012 07:55 PM
Tamron 70-200 f2.8 vs Sigma 70-200 f2.8 In Low Light	Christopher M.W.T	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	11-23-2009 03:57 PM
Sigma 18-50/f2.8 vs Tamron 28-75/f2.8 vs Sigma 24-70/f2.8?	raider	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	08-07-2007 04:26 PM

11-03-2014, 02:30 PM	#2
redcat Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: Paris Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,939	they are two different lens with the range 70-150 overlap, I didn't use those before but the 70-200 receive a lot of recommendation in this forum, there is an in-depth review for that ^^

11-03-2014, 04:05 PM	#3
starjedi Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: New Jersey Posts: 932	Originally posted by Hostis Hi guys. I got my self a Sigma 50-150 from ebay and got it shipped from Japan. I really love it. But would you think that the IQ is better on the 70-200? The 70-200 is ready to go with FF when that day comes. Best regards. 70-200 is a lens with good reputation across the different mount. But 50-150 is not bad also. Note one is ff-compatible and heavy, the latter is aps-c only and relative light. So it is not fair to compare those twos. Do not regret your purchase for not buying sigma 70-200. More importantly it will also give you reason to buy pentax comings 70-200! :-)

11-03-2014, 04:56 PM	#4
MadMathMind Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Houston, TX Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,717	The 70-200 is a great lens, but it is incredibly heavy. It's too heavy to carry around unless you are sure you going to use it. The 70-200 clocks in at over 1300g, depending on whether you get the OS version or the II (no OS, so lighter by about 100g). The 50-150 is about 800g, which is pretty comfortable to carry.

11-03-2014, 09:41 PM	#5
wed7 Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Manila, Philippines Posts: 1,421	The newer version of the 50-150 (not available in Pentax) is now as big (77mm) and as heavy as their 70-200 counterparts.

11-04-2014, 01:07 AM	#6
Hostis New Member Join Date: Mar 2014 Posts: 6 Original Poster	Thx guys. Perhaps better to wait for FF before I make any changes. I might keep the 50-150 with my K3 and 70-200 for the FF. The range of 50-150 with a aps-c is almost as 70-200 on FF. If Pentax makes a 70-200 it would cost more than 2000$ And in Sweden it would get closer to 3000$

11-05-2014, 11:01 AM	#7
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	You just got a lens, take your time to get to know it No need to rush to the next big thing. Also, I think that the difference between 50mm and 70mm is more significant than 150mm and 200mm, but this might depend on your needs. Some photographers need those extra 50mm on the long end, some need even more than that! I suggest you stick with your lens for a while, until your needs become more apparent. When you feel the lens is limiting you, preventing you from getting the shots you want, then it might be time to buy new gear.

11-06-2014, 10:59 AM	#8
Hostis New Member Join Date: Mar 2014 Posts: 6 Original Poster	Originally posted by Na Horuk You just got a lens, take your time to get to know it No need to rush to the next big thing. Also, I think that the difference between 50mm and 70mm is more significant than 150mm and 200mm, but this might depend on your needs. Some photographers need those extra 50mm on the long end, some need even more than that! I suggest you stick with your lens for a while, until your needs become more apparent. When you feel the lens is limiting you, preventing you from getting the shots you want, then it might be time to buy new gear. Yeah, you're right! The thing is. I can sell my lens and buy a 70-200 without losing any money pretty much.. But i guess, the 20mm on the short end is what i really need. The perfect lens for me would be a 10-300mm at f2.8

11-06-2014, 11:18 AM	#9
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	Originally posted by Hostis Yeah, you're right! The thing is. I can sell my lens and buy a 70-200 without losing any money pretty much.. But i guess, the 20mm on the short end is what i really need. The perfect lens for me would be a 10-300mm at f2.8 That would be a monster lens! The Sigma 70-200 OS is a fine lens and it is hand holdable IMO, as I use it quite a bit, but some don't like the weight. I recently acquired a DA*50-135 which I believe is similar in size and weight to your 50-150. It is much easier to carry and shift around for fast moving shots, and the IQ is wonderful. Depending on your intended use it would dictate whether you want to move to the 70-200 or not. Do you need the long end or is 150 enough and the wider 50mm side is more important?

11-07-2014, 06:25 AM - 1 Like	#10
redcat Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: Paris Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,939	Originally posted by Hostis The perfect lens for me would be a 10-300mm at f2.8 well, and if it's a pancake lens, that would be my purchase for sure =))