Sigma 150-600 Contemporary

For a long time I've had no lens covering any longer focal length than 200 mm. Now and then I've wanted something longer, but for various reasons I've never pulled the trigger. When the Tamron 150-600 arrived I was really close, but it never happened. I suppose I simply haven't been ready. From what I have read about the Sigma 150-600 f/5-6.3 Contemporary it seems like a really good lens within my budget, and when a Swedish retailer did a "10% off Sigma stuff" campaign last weekend I suddenly fell for the temptation. Yesterday it arrived and today I had a couple of hours left for some test shooting. I thought I'd share some first impressions:

- It comes in a nice padded bag including hood and strap.

- It looks good and seems well built. Fully extracted at 600 mm it looks a bit fragile (and maybe it is), but it still feels rather solid at 600 mm.

- The reviews I've read seem correct regarding IQ: It's very good up to around 400 mm, and then it falls towards the long end. I think it's still fairly good at 600/6.3 though.

- Once before I borrowed a 300 mm lens for one day, but except from that I've never shot with anything longer than 200 mm. 600 mm on a 7D gives a really narrow angle of view - it's going to take some practice to use this lens.

- My previous Sigma experiences aren't too good regarding AF, but this lens seems to focus correctly out of the box. Someday I may do a more comprehensive test of AF accuracy. Mainly it focused rapidly today, but now and then it had difficulties finding focus. I'm not sure the lens is to blame though - I was struggling both with the small view and with holding the lens still, and the AF point wasn't always on target. (Moving targets at 600 mm on crop sensor will take some practice.

To sum my first impressions up, this lens seems to be exactly what I wanted: A good supertele zoom at a reasonable price. If my first impressions last, I will consider it a bargain.

And, of course, a couple of shots. The first one at 388 mm and the second one at 600 mm, both at f/6.3. I include both the entire shots and 100% crops for some pixel peeping. (Basic development in LR including some NR and sharpening is done.)

388 mm, f/6.3, ISO400
https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8879/...2544146c_o.jpghttps://farm1.staticflickr.com/469/1...954fbb26_o.jpg

600 mm, f/6.3, ISO400
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/414/1...211e1e4a_o.jpghttps://farm1.staticflickr.com/420/1...fd7398d6_o.jpg

Hey...congrats on the new glass. I've been very impressed with the Sports version. But, I've paid attention as the reviews have rolled in and, honestly, the gap between the two seems very minor. In some ways, because of cost, size and weight, the "C" may be the better option for a lot of people.

As an FYI, I find the images useable at 600 f/6.3, but, at least with the "S," sharpen up nicely at f/8.

As I’ve understood the reviews the “S” is better than the “C” regarding IQ, but the difference doesn’t seem big. (And some reviewers actually find the “C” slightly better at certain focal lengths.) My brief experience of the “C” version indicates good AF performance, and probably the “S” is even better (the “Sports” designation indicates that the “S” may have better AF performance).

Maybe the main difference between the versions is build quality. I had a look at the “S” version in a store and it seems really solid. That may be the main reason it weighs 50% more.

I believe both versions have their potential buyers, and for me the “C” version was the better choice. (For my needs the IQ difference just didn’t make up for the differences in weight and price.)

For sure I will go for more practicing, testing various apertures etc. For example I’m curious of how good it can perform at 600 mm under better circumstances, i.e. stopped down to f/8 on a tripod, but that will have to wait until the weekend.

FYI...Bryan posted his review of the "C"