Sigma 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC HSM Tested

Just completed a test of the 50-150 F2.8 EX DC HSM against my Canon 70-200 f2.8IS and 70-200 f4IS. Overall assessment and other comments are at my site and at each test page:

http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/s50_150

Feel free to leave questions/comments at my site or here on this thread.

Not bad for a lens that is only $680. I agree about the findings. I'm starting to think that Sigma DG lenses handle CA better than Canon L's and I also used to think they had a warmer color cast, but am not seeing it. It does look softer at the 150mm end compared to the Canon, however for the price and weight, this appears to be a very light and portable fast zoom.

I agree, I probably won't sell my 70-200 for this lens either.

This is a great focal range for basketball if this lense will perform well enough to focus fast enough in that kind of low light situation.

I'd like to see some comments from owners regarding performance in basketball.

thanks

This sounds like the ideal lens to pair with the 17-55 f/2.8 for a great variety of situations. However, I am waiting to see if Canon will bring out a similar EF-S lens with image stabilization. If this does not happen I will take a serious look at the Sigma.

Usual rigour! It looks good (as I would expect!) Pity its DC tho!

ronmayhew wrote in post #2427433
This is a great focal range for basketball if this lense will perform well enough to focus fast enough in that kind of low light situation.

AF speed on this lens is slightly slower than the L's. If the L's are a 10 rating, this EX I'd say is about 8.5. It's definitely quick, but nothing like the 85f1.8 or 135f2. Of course, not many lenses are like those ones either. My impression is that this lens would get you less keepers than the equivalent L's in this regard and for indoor sports.

Good test! I was really anxious to pair the 50-150 with a tokina 16-50 but it seems like I prefer the further reach of the 70-200. Plus, it seems that the 50-150 doesn't like focusing close. Almost all users have reported that.

It looks funny ... I don't like it

Good test Jo

condyk wrote in post #2430771
It looks funny ... I don't like it

Good test Jo

Heard it all now, Dave concerned about how a lens LOOKS!

I think you did a good job on this test. I think it was fair and honest. And I think it is one of the better reviews I've seen on this lens

I do disagree on some points. I think the AF is as fast as the 70-200 f/4 (non IS) and the IQ a little better.

I've also never had the close focusing problem. Maybe I just got lucky.
But all in all, a well done test.

ronmayhew wrote in post #2427433
This is a great focal range for basketball if this lense will perform well enough to focus fast enough in that kind of low light situation.

I'd like to see some comments from owners regarding performance in basketball.

thanks

I think it will. Hopefully, after Christmas and New Years I will be able to attend some games and find out. If I do, i'll let you know.

EOSAddict wrote in post #2430796
Heard it all now, Dave concerned about how a lens LOOKS!

It's the next level in growing as a photographer ... Look good, shoot good

There are some damned ugly lenses out there for sure. Every time you put one of those to your face how you not start thinking you're kissing a Camel ... and how can that not impact on the existential moment of exposure? Answer me that wise ass

i wish Sigma built in their new OS feature in this lens too...then I would have considered it.

It's fairly closely priced with SIgma's 70-200 2.8 ex though.

ronmayhew wrote in post #2427433
This is a great focal range for basketball if this lense will perform well enough to focus fast enough in that kind of low light situation.

I'd like to see some comments from owners regarding performance in basketball.

thanks

70-200 2.8 will still work well in basketball. Or you use a midrange zoom.

Coco-Puffs wrote in post #2432607
i wish Sigma built in their new OS feature in this lens too...then I would have considered it.

I think they have their eye on the wider market and see the different companies putting body based IS in. Whatever the 'experts' or canon think about body or lens based IS the reality is, to my way of thinking and seeing, that the mass market want body IS. That won't change because the commercial case is too strong.

I was on the fence w/ this lens. Thank you for posting your review!!! Much appreciated!!!