Sigma APO 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM - Bigmos

Last sunday about 4:30 took loads of this memory card was saving just as it went across the moon has been cropped a bit to fill frame...get loads of buzzards round here don't think i'll get the moon there again though..
Happy with lens so far

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

wow, thats awesome

Dragon fly at Andrews lake in the San Juans of Colorado (~11,000 ft). 500mm, 1/320", f/8, with 100% crop. No pp other than the conversion from RAW to TIFF to JPEG.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Roy P wrote in post #5934100
My 100-400L could not give me results as good as these.

Seriously?

I'm still seeing nothing but soft shots - I'm really disappointed with what I've seen from the new Sigmas so far.

Here's some recent 100-400mm shots for comparison - at 400mm, handheld. They're just pictures I happen to have posted up on some webspace, and aren't special in any way, but I'm seeing nothing this sharp from the 150-500mm, I'm afraid:

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

Keith R wrote in post #5948490
Seriously?

I'm still seeing nothing but soft shots - I'm really disappointed with what I've seen from the new Sigmas so far.

Here's a recent 100-400mm shot for comparison - at 400mm, handheld. I'm seeing nothing this sharp from the 150-500mm, I'm afraid:

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

I know this is technically "off topic" for the thread, but I think - given that the 150-500mm is being positioned as a 100-400mm alternative - that some perspective might be useful.

I'd have to agree. My 100-400 gives me sharper images. Apart from a few copies that under a lot of light looked good, most pics seem a bit soft. Still a good value but they could have done a better job I find.

These are decent shots but nothing amazing: there is only one, maybe two keepers there for me. I think you have selective vision. There are better shots posted from the Sigma IMO, but there is also plenty of rubbish.

It's looks like the 100-400mm was stopped down to 6.3. From some of the one's i've seen, the sigma does good stopped down also.

Lets see the Sigma is $500 cheaper than the 100-400, has longer reach and better OS. I personally have had great success with my Sigma. I have also seen poor images from 100-400, and loads of grumbling from 100-400 owners about issues.

For me the Sigma works out great. I don't get all the strutting about lenses. No lens I have seen is perfect. You make choices and decide if the lens meets your needs. I find the 150-500 to be a very good lens.

I love the sigma too, but i cant afford canon L glass right now. therefore i make do with what i can afford. heres a pic without pp and the same one with pp. i have come across some soft pics, but i do think it could of been my own fault too.

Don't worry its just the Canon 100-400 L supporters club jumping in to have their say. I have the Sigma now and had the Canon in the past and I have had much better results from the Sigma than I got from the Canon. This however could be due to several factors such as the extra reach and the fact that maybe I have had just a bit more experience now! There was a poster on DPreview who posted some really poor shots taken with the Sigma and complained about the lens, with all the Canon fans cheering on the sideline. A close look at his shots revealed this he was really just a lousy photographer.

ALL YOUR PHOTOS SUCK!!!!

They make me want to buy the lens... and I can't afford it...

:p

condyk wrote in post #5794512
When the 'Rules or someone else says X sometimes we see others jumping aboard saying the same just to look clever or informed. And if people post shots to back up what they say, like Rob did, then their opinion counts for more IMO. For me the lens more than lived up to expectation.

I totally agree with condyk. I don't own either lens, but I totally agree with everything he says.

Sorry I had to do it.

AlexinS.A. wrote in post #5950301
Don't worry its just the Canon 100-400 L supporters club jumping in to have their say. I have the Sigma now and had the Canon in the past and I have had much better results from the Sigma than I got from the Canon. This however could be due to several factors such as the extra reach and the fact that maybe I have had just a bit more experience now! There was a poster on DPreview who posted some really poor shots taken with the Sigma and complained about the lens, with all the Canon fans cheering on the sideline. A close look at his shots revealed this he was really just a lousy photographer.

Hi Alex,
Had a look at your site and you have some lovely piccies there.

I may have upset some peolple with my 100-400L experience, not intentional, but sure it was just my copy, too many other good pics around from that model for me to read anything into my experience, I don't do formal tests just what I felt from normal useage. Final straw for me was when internal baffles became detached and flopped around inside.

May try the Siggy 120-400 but cricket 2nd Test starts soon so watching us getting our asses kicked again by S.A. will take priority.

Roy P wrote in post #5951994
Hi Alex,
Had a look at your site and you have some lovely piccies there.

I may have upset some peolple with my 100-400L experience, not intentional, but sure it was just my copy, too many other good pics around from that model for me to read anything into my experience, I don't do formal tests just what I felt from normal useage. Final straw for me was when internal baffles became detached and flopped around inside.

May try the Siggy 120-400 but cricket 2nd Test starts soon so watching us getting our asses kicked again by S.A. will take priority.

Yeah England are good at that. (I'm Australian BTW).

I hear the 100-400 is difficult to find a sharp version of.