JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you accept the use of cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 174000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
Pros: Good picture quality even at f6.3 in 600 mm (but even better at f8). Excelent construction and weather seal. Nice tripod ring (even better with AP-608 foot). Zoom ring is very smooth. Autofocus is consistent and quick enough. Customization as in other Sigma lenses with USB dock. Great value for the money
Cons: Weight and f6.3 slow aperture, but knew both before buying and decided to buy anyway
Opinion: Thru the years, I used several telefoto lenses from Canon and Sigma, zoom and fixed ones (Canon 300 f4 IS, 300 f.8 IS, 400 f5.6L, 70-200 f.28 IS, 100-400 II, Sigma 150-600 Contemporary and Sport).
I learned from experience that 400 is not enough for ME anymore, so that rule out some options. And of course, for some type of photography, you cannot beat an f2.8 prime.
But for the 90% of my telephoto nature pictures, there is no other lens I would choose. The 150-600 Sport is the right choice for me now. The other 2 possible better options are out of my price range (500 f4 or 200-400).
I was happy with the contemporary which I used for 3 years, but the Sport has a little more autofocus consistency and image contrast and it is easier to use on a tripod or monopod. Also even if it is heavier, it is built a lot better and will withstand the usage in extreme conditions.
Never used the Tamrons, so I cannot provide opinion. And I do not consider Nikon or Sony brands as I have several cameras and lenses for Canon and cannot switch so easily.
Pros: The large focal range without converters. Build quality
Cons: Weigh and cost. Overall performing is on average stage
Opinion: For Nikon bodies the 200-500 is twice better and cheaper than the Sigma....
On the long edge (500mm) the Nikon perform better for me in a terms of sharp and contrast. 600mm on the Sigma vs 700mm on Nikon with TC 1.4 are comparable and very close to each other but with the Nikon you have additional100mm...
One more positive point is that the Nikon is far more lighter that the Sigma...
On the end I don't not recommend this lens in a terms of weigh, fast focusing and cost...
Pros: Sharpness, build quality, custom settings / USB dock
Cons: Weight
Opinion: This lens is real value for money. You get great quality, sturdiness and very sharp photos (even at 600mm). With the USB dock you ar able to adjust the focus setting, but when using several cameras i prefer finetuning on the camera's.For birds in flight i think the lens is a bit slow.
I use this lens combined with the Nikon D7200 These two combined creates great photo's
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Pros:Fast AF (if set by dock in speed priority), very high sharpness (comparable to 500 F4 on some bodies, leggesi after), completely metal construction
Cons:Weight that does not allow the use freehand (I am a bodybuilder of 96kg and I think I can decree definitively)
Opinion:It's a lens that amazed me, especially when I tested the sharpness at F8 against a Nikon 500 F4. First argument that trait, which is probably also the most requested: unless you use D500 and D850 you will NOT see differences in a comparison 1:1. These subtleties In fact emerge thanks to the pixel density of the aforementioned machines, which rightly declare the fixed winner. The problem is that the difference is NOT frightening, and on 24mpx machines with AA filter the differences are not there. Obviously These considerations apply to F8, TA the Nikon gains brightness, etc., with the obvious reflections of the case. Another aspect that I have compared is the speed of AF, and even here I have not found substantial differences. It is true that the Sigma can sometimes cannate the shot, but it is also true that objectively if set by dock in priority focusing with the distance limiter placed at our leisure, the usability is almost identical. Trying to overstay on long rrames, is a lens certainly excellsa. Unfortunately It has a very important weight that severely restricts the use of freehand, if not in my opinion forbids. But Sigma has deliberately taken this direction, even inserting a metal lens hood with a screw mount (Nikon's super-Tele style). For the intended use so I think it is the perfect lens for the roving photographic hunting from shed, where the focal excursion represents a true added value compared to a fixed lens. For lovers of long distances and quality I believe that a 500 F4 is inevitably a more prudent choice. For those who are able to approach these not to cross, I doubt that the investment of a fixed lens is justified.
Pros:AF very fast, sharpness, precision AF, focal hikes, build quality, price, weight and tropicalization
Cons:Sharpness, fixed tripod collar, balancing with light machine bodies
Opinion:I have had this lens for more than four months, and I have to say that I am very satisfied with the purchase. Supertele Zoom very versatile, from nature photography to Motosport, in short, all genres that require a certain distance from the subject. High quality construction, very solid and resistant, tested in all weather conditions, rain, snow and humidity, despite this has never given problems in terms of performance. The sharpness is really good at f/6.3 (600mm) But if you close it to 7.1 becomes a beautiful razor blade. The weight many consider it a problem, but to remember that the Bianconi house Canon weigh from 1 to 3kg more (just think of the 500 F4 first generation with about 5kg) so also on this nothing to say, if not for long photographic sessions , at least one monopod is a must. Only flaw (in my opinion) is the collar for the tripod not removable, which in some situations may result in obstruction. Obviously this lens is not sensible to compare it to the large L series of canon because the Sigma with €1800 we bring home a good compromise against the approximately €10,000 of 600 F4 is II canon. In short, this is a great lens for those who like me to do naturalistic without selling a kidney to buy the original "first". More than satisfied, rated 9.5 out of 10
The sample photos are selected automatically between all photos posted by JuzaPhoto members, using the camera and the lens selected in the techs. If you find evident errors (e.g. photos taken with cameras and lenses that are not available yet), you can contribute to improve the page by sending a private message to the user that has entered incorrect values in the photo caption.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
![[editors pick]](shared_files/layout/ep_badge.jpg){kind=icon}
![[retina]](shared_files/layout/retina_badge.jpg){kind=icon}
