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

DDCSD wrote in post #8353023
Little bit of airshow action from the weekend.

F-22 Raptor

Very nice shots. Great action you've captured here.

MrGreen wrote in post #8356973
Very nice shots. Great action you've captured here.

Thanks! It was an amazing performance and I feel fortunate to have witnessed it. The things that aircraft can do is absolutely unbelievable.

reprazent wrote in post #8324073
Those are fantastic 'airshow' pictures Gabe. I was looking at the 100-400, but when I see your photos I have to think twice...

Do not even think of saying this on DPReview's forum.The canon supporters will attack you bigtime! I know, I am still licking my wounds (lol). Seriously I had the 100-400 L IS lens and was not impressed. Get much better results with the Sigma. Maybe the extra 100mm reach or something.

What are you talking about, you can't say it anywhere. Say it around here and there will be plenty of people who throw rocks at you.


People still make cons out of the weight and aperture range. I say "blah" to all of it. Canon, Sigma, Tamron, etc.. Who really honestly cares?? The only reason why Canon lemmings don't like Sigma is because they haven't used Sigma. I know Sigma had some big issues, but there's no issues lately. Since I bought my lens last year I haven't seen as much bad about the Bigmos as I have about the 100-400mm.

I won't go through the pros/cons list again, it's been run over too many times, by me and by others. But suffice it to say that I'd take the Bigmos over the 100-400mm any day of the week. Individual skill and shooting style aside, there's no way you can look past the IQ of this lens.

katodog wrote in post #8402456
What are you talking about, you can't say it anywhere. Say it around here and there will be plenty of people who throw rocks at you.


People still make cons out of the weight and aperture range. I say "blah" to all of it. Canon, Sigma, Tamron, etc.. Who really honestly cares?? The only reason why Canon lemmings don't like Sigma is because they haven't used Sigma. I know Sigma had some big issues, but there's no issues lately. Since I bought my lens last year I haven't seen as much bad about the Bigmos as I have about the 100-400mm.

I won't go through the pros/cons list again, it's been run over too many times, by me and by others. But suffice it to say that I'd take the Bigmos over the 100-400mm any day of the week. Individual skill and shooting style aside, there's no way you can look past the IQ of this lens.

I'm not about to get rid of my Bigmos, and I can't ever see getting rid of it, but if someone held out both the Bigmos and the 100-400L and said pick one.....well, I'd take the Canon.

If you don't mind my asking...Why??


What draws your attention to the Canon? Why would you choose it over the Sigma? Since you have the Sigma now, what do you think would be different had you bought the Canon instead?


Given the choice, I'd pick the Sigma. There's no reason not to. But, if you were to hold both out in front of me, I'd take both of them. I love the Sigma, and can't understand why people still downtalk the lens when compared to the 100-400mm, but let's face it...The Canon 100-400mm lens is probably one of the most desired lenses around, I'd be silly to turn it down.

katodog wrote in post #8404074
If you don't mind my asking...Why??


What draws your attention to the Canon? Why would you choose it over the Sigma? Since you have the Sigma now, what do you think would be different had you bought the Canon instead?


Given the choice, I'd pick the Sigma. There's no reason not to. But, if you were to hold both out in front of me, I'd take both of them. I love the Sigma, and can't understand why people still downtalk the lens when compared to the 100-400mm, but let's face it...The Canon 100-400mm lens is probably one of the most desired lenses around, I'd be silly to turn it down.

The simple answer - the Canon is worth more and can re-sell better.

I bought my Bigmos used off a guy locally. I bought it for half the price of a new one up here, AND it came with a high quality Heliopan UV filter.

The Canon can use cheaper ($$$ - not quality) filters, whereas I can't even consider buying another filter for my Bigmos. I'm lucky I already have a filter for it!

I love the lens, but I do wish it had the same aperture range as the Canon. Sometimes, and I mean sometimes, the f/6.3 can be annoying.

I've seen shots of animals, airshows,Bird, insects...

How does this perform let's say Daylight concerts/sports?

Well, I think that's one thing we don't have shots of yet, concerts. The sad thing is that even at 150mm, this lens might be a bit long for concerts. Maybe from the nosebleeds you'd get some shots, but not up close.

We do have some sports shots in here somewhere, and the airshow shots would be similar in that they're of moving subjects, just like sports shots. The only difference might be lighting and exposure. I think there's some moving motorcycle shots too.


The one thing to point out is that most people are buying this lens for wildlife and birding, probably because long primes are too damn expensive for some of us. I don't think it would have any issues with concerts and faster moving sports as long as the light was good. The shots I took of the R/C airplanes came out good for me, in better hands they'd be a lot better. But, as fast as they move, you can see that it's not too hard to get good shots if the setting is right.

Having said all of that, I'd love to see some concert shots with this lens.

I've used it it for softball and soccer. Used it for the Midwest Regional Soccer tourney and it works great. Wish it was a little faster focusing (going from rack to rack), but it keeps in in AI servo just fine.

I've never used it for concerts, I mostly shoot indoor concerts. I also think it would be waaaaay to long for concerts, unless you're shooting from the soundboard (or seats a ways away).

addt'l question...
I'm in a market for a very long tele...

I'm considering this and the 50-500ex.
I'm considering this inspite not the EX due to os ...

but i'm definetly going to buy either a sigma or canon 70-200 2.8 most prob the sigma due to cost....

Would the EX deignation be worth addtional roughtly 200 usd ( Philippine price ) in terms of picture quality? but it would overlap my 70 - 200

First time out with my lens, 500mm really wasn't long enough but it's certainly a lot better than anything else I've used.

Image quality is pretty good too. It ain't no L, but it compares favorably to my 55-250mm.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

aerosmith9110 wrote in post #8421266
addt'l question...
I'm in a market for a very long tele...

I'm considering this and the 50-500ex.
I'm considering this inspite not the EX due to os ...

but i'm definetly going to buy either a sigma or canon 70-200 2.8 most prob the sigma due to cost....

Would the EX deignation be worth addtional roughtly 200 usd ( Philippine price ) in terms of picture quality? but it would overlap my 70 - 200

Sigma is only putting the EX designation on lenses that have a constant aperture. The 150-500 is an EX lens in every sense of the word, just without having EX on the lens.

It is a better lens than the 50-500. The only reason to get the 50-500 over the 150-500 is if you need the 50mm.