38 replies to this topic

[Daniel]

I've been having issues with my Sigma 150-500 lens. The pictures don't seem to be as sharp and focused as I think they should be but rather soft and slightly out. Just wondering if it is because of the camera bodies I've been using or are they too new for this older type lens. I've been told that the D800E is to much for this lens. 

 

Does anyone have or tried this lens and how was your experience with it and what camera bodies did you use at the time with it?

 

Attached is one of the better shots I've taken with it but it is still much to soft for me. Click on the pic to enlarge.

 

Camera used:   D800E

Settings:            f/8    

                          1/2000

                          ISO 1000

                          500mm

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[K-9]

I know Nikon listed the best Nikkor lenses for use on the D800/E, but I haven't seen them release any details on which 3rd party lenses are recommended.  It might be hit or miss and this lens may unfortunately be a miss with this sensor.  Have you gotten better results on a different body?

[Daniel]

I've done a few tests on my D60 from inside and it looks a little better for D60 standards but haven't taken it out yet and tested it out on any birds with that setup. The lens quality is also not acceptable on the D7100 body either. I also have the newer version of the Nikkor 80-400mm and it works great with the D800E and D7100. I've been told as well that the D800E is too much for the sigma 150-500mm lens from a professional but I wished I had known this before I bought it. I'm hoping someone has had some luck on here with it.

[Merco_61]

I have never owned one, but I have used two different examples. They lose quite a bit of contrast and sharpness above ~370 mm and are a bit soft overall. It was acceptable, but just barely so on the D700 and far too soft on the D300. It is not surprising that the D800 and the D7100 have too high a resolution.

The D800 puts great demands on the quality of the glass, and the D800E even more so.

[K-9]

I've owned two different Sigma zooms over the years and sold both off due to lack of sharpness.  Their zooms were never known for being razor sharp to begin with.

[AJSimpson]

Sigma are not the sharpest pin in the box, you can get away with it on some  DX cameras, on a full frame. no way, (if you really want to throw the focus out put a U/V filter on it,)

 

I had this lens for about two months and got shot of it, Sorry but taking a high end camera and putting a budget third party lens is never a good idea

[MJL]

Yeap, the "Bigma" are never reputed to be sharp at the maximum reach and a 36M sensor would definitely confirm it.  Your photo is actually already better than what I can get from my 50-500.  I usually have to do a lot of PP to get an acceptable image for publishing.  BTW, their focusing speed are acceptable at best, I think that have something to do with the small aperture kick in very early, e.g. f/6.3 starting at ~ 300mm.

[Daniel]

Sigma are not the sharpest pin in the box, you can get away with it on some DX cameras, on a full frame. no way, (if you really want to throw the focus out put a U/V filter on it,)

I had this lens for about two months and got shot of it, Sorry but taking a high end camera and putting a budget third party lens is never a good idea

:/ I have a uv filter on it. The guy I talked to about the lens after a got back from my trip had mentioned the same about the camera, he said only use the best or professional lenses on the D800e. I guess I learn't the hard way but don't regret buying the d800e. I then bought the newer nikkor 80-400 after testing it, I guess the saying or question is true: "you wouldn't put cheep gas in a super car would you".?Lol
Gunna get my hands on a d7000 later today and test it on the lens as well as do some firm ware updates on the cameras and see if that helps with the issue.

[MJL]

Sorry but taking a high end camera and putting a budget third party lens is never a good idea

 

I agree with you partially.  I have owned 6 Sigma zooms because they either provide me the range or the cost/benefit ratio that no other manufacturers want to put on the market.  The main point is to be aware of the limits of each lens whether it is a Nikon or Rokinon, that would make the best use out of any lens on any (film or digital) camera.

[Rontography]

I heard from a guy that bought one that it took 3 different lenses to get a good one. Apparently quality control is not one of their strong points. But when he did get a good one the results were awesome.

[PrettyCranium]

What is the issue with the UV filter? I just bought the Sigma 50-500mm and put a filter on it . . . With such an expensive lens I want the front to be protected. My images have not been sharp, but I have barely tested it. Also, it's a monster. Huge for puny me.

[K-9]

I heard from a guy that bought one that it took 3 different lenses to get a good one. Apparently quality control is not one of their strong points. But when he did get a good one the results were awesome.

 

Yes, I've heard that as well, and even though their latest primes are supposed to be sharp, the fact it takes some people a few tries to get a good sample keeps me away from the brand.

[Daniel]

What is the issue with the UV filter? I just bought the Sigma 50-500mm and put a filter on it . . . With such an expensive lens I want the front to be protected. My images have not been sharp, but I have barely tested it. Also, it's a monster. Huge for puny me.

I haven't tried mine with the filter yet so I don't know. I bought the filter though for the same reasons. Actually all my lenses have a uv filter for protection. For the weight of the lens this is where the black rapids strap comes in handy.

Yes, I've heard that as well, and even though their latest primes are supposed to be sharp, the fact it takes some people a few tries to get a good sample keeps me away from the brand.

I hope this is true because I talked a sales person today and he said he never heard of anyone having any same issues with the lens like I have and they sold a lot. So after i do some firm ware updates and testing with a D7000 later today and in the next few days, if I have the same issue persist the I am gunna send it in to Sigma and have them look at it.

[Daniel]

I tested the lens today with a Nikon D7000. Here is one picture. Note the picture is reduced from a 93mb TIF file to a 2mb JPEG file.

 

Settings used: ISO 3200

                               1/3200

                                f7.1

Focal Point:            500mm

 

Also I removed the UV filter and I don't know if this made a difference but will have to try it again tomorrow with it on.

 

Click on the photo to enlarge.

 

Your Comments appreciated. 

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[MJL]

Sigma are not the sharpest pin in the box, you can get away with it on some  DX cameras, on a full frame. no way, (if you really want to throw the focus out put a U/V filter on it,)

 

I had this lens for about two months and got shot of it, Sorry but taking a high end camera and putting a budget third party lens is never a good idea

I have owned/used over twenty AF Ilenses of different focal length, aperture, brands & mounts, but had never heard of, read or experienced myself that any AF lens operation was interfered by an UV filter.

 

Any reference will be much appreciated.

[Merco_61]

Sigma are not the sharpest pin in the box, you can get away with it on some  DX cameras, on a full frame. no way, (if you really want to throw the focus out put a U/V filter on it,)

 

I had this lens for about two months and got shot of it, Sorry but taking a high end camera and putting a budget third party lens is never a good idea

 

I don't understand the correlation between sensor size and sharpness. The D7100 and the D800 have the same pixel pitch and have the same trouble with inferior lenses. The D800E with it's weaker AA filter is even more demanding, but it has nothing to do with sensor size.

The D300 and the D700 are both 12 MP which gives the D700 a lower pixel density and lower demands on the sharpness of the lenses. Vignetting is another kettle of fish...

 

Secondly, what does a UV filter have to do with focus? Sharpness, yes, but focus?

 

I have to agree with the comment on putting cheap glass on good cameras.

[AJSimpson]

Oh dear I opened a can of worms here, sorry, and I have no real point of reference, they was a post on a couple of photographing sites but damn if I can find it,now.

 

A while back I was working as part of a team of Photographers in the Scottish Highlands, one of the guys I was working with was using this lens on an FX camera, returning to the hotel he was getting the shots, but none were usable as they were all soft, He posted on the net, and a lot of people adviced him to take the uv filter off. which helped a bit.

 

Another thing with zoom lenses, you need to find the lenses sweet spot. (Google it) as with most zooms they can be soft at each end of the range.

Most people with a 500mm, will end up shooting at the full focal length,.

 

Sorry it was never my intention to throw the spanner in the works 

[Merco_61]

Like I thought, the removal of filters is about sharpness and contrast, not focus.
Thanks for the clarification.

[MJL]

Like I thought, the removal of filters is about sharpness and contrast, not focus.
Thanks for the clarification.

That must be the case.

 

Bigma are neither really sharp nor fast, they just provide a better reach for the money.  An additional piece of glass in front of it will definitely affect the IQ.

 

Here is an action shot with a Sigma DG UV filter and lot of cropping & PP.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[Daniel]

Oh dear I opened a can of worms here, sorry, and I have no real point of reference, they was a post on a couple of photographing sites but damn if I can find it,now.

 

A while back I was working as part of a team of Photographers in the Scottish Highlands, one of the guys I was working with was using this lens on an FX camera, returning to the hotel he was getting the shots, but none were usable as they were all soft, He posted on the net, and a lot of people adviced him to take the uv filter off. which helped a bit.

 

Another thing with zoom lenses, you need to find the lenses sweet spot. (Google it) as with most zooms they can be soft at each end of the range.

Most people with a 500mm, will end up shooting at the full focal length,.

 

Sorry it was never my intention to throw the spanner in the works 

 

I don't think you opened a can of worms AJSimpson, you were sharing what you heard about what other people experienced or reported without the UV Filter and I appreciate this. And I would listen or appreciate any info or experiences anyone has had with this lens right now wether they agree or heard different results because I want to rectify the situation. I've heard it before as well that a Filter can effect the auto focus to some degree weather its speed or not, I don't know if this is true or not but I decided to take the UV filter off to try a different angle to the testing and as well as too try an older camera body like the D7000. If everyone agreed or had the same experiences or info to relay then I think the forum would be a little boring.

 

I have also updated the firm ware on the D800E and will try this camera again on the lens as well as with and without the UV filter on at the same time, And also will try with the UV filter this time when the D7000 is on the lens.  Its suppose to be nice out today so hopefully things work out. Will post some pictures of the results later this afternoon today. its 9:33 a.m. here in this part of Canada right now.