Thoughts about Sigma 150-500mm or 50-500mm lens for sports

<p>I'm considering investing in either the Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM APO lens or the Sigma 50-500mm f/4.5-6.3 DG OS lens and would love to get feedback on either of these lens.</p>

<p>I take a lot of sports pictures of my kids playing outdoor sports (field hockey and soccer). I already have the Nikon 70-300 lens, which is a very good lens but I'm finding that the reach is not good enough. The Nikon 500mm lens looks quite nice except that is over $8k and I thought that one of these Sigma would be a good compromise.</p>

<p>I currently shoot a D90 and plan on staying DX format as I don't see the need to upgrade to FX (especially since I would lose 1/3 of my reach).</p>

<p>Hoping to hear from others who have used either Sigma lens. Thank you!</p>

<p>Barry - </p>

<p>I have the Sigma 150-500 - and it is a life saver at soccer or anything where you can't get close to the action. With it's size however, you won't be able to sneak it into Pro or College stadiums... Darn. </p>

<p>Two drawbacks of it are the weight and the slowness of the lens itself. AF is fast (D300 / D700 / D7000 / D200) and pretty accurate. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

<div></div>

<p>Another way to get longer reach is the Nikon 300mm f/4 AF-S with an the TC-14E II teleconverter,which will give 420mm at f/5.6 with little quality loss from the superb 300mm f/4 alone. Note that it is not recommended to add a teleconverter to your 70-300mm, and that, even if it were O.K., the aperture at maximum focal length would be f/8.</p>

<p>Regarding the Sigma 150-500mm, you might want to look at the review by Thom Hogan (<a href="http://www.bythom.com/sigma-150-500mm-lens-review.htm">link</a>). Hogan is very good on Nikon equipment.</p>

<p>As far as I know the IQ of the 50-500 is superior to the 150-500. It weighs a ton but you can handhold in good light. A monopod takes some getting used to, but it is quick to set up and helps a lot.<br>

I like the flexibility of the zoom range of the 50-500 as you can frame nicely when the action is near or far. I use my 50-500 on my Canon 40D and 50D, as well as my 5D2.<br>

Your IQ on DX format should be very good. Even on FF on my 5D2 the IQ is acceptable...pretty close to the Canon 100-400L.</p>

<p>I have the 150-500, and the reach is quite nice. However, in order to get the sharp images, you need a monopod (don't count too much on the OS) and lots of good light. From 400mm and up it is a bit soft. Not the lens I use most, but on the other hand, not one that is on my current sales list either!</p>

<p>Aside from this 150-500 review <a href="http://www.bythom.com/sigma-150-500mm-lens-review.htm">http://www.bythom.com/sigma-150-500mm-lens-review.htm</a> keep in mind that the relatively slow max aperture of f6.3 on DX format will most likely limit your use to day time shooting. Your ISO will go up very quickly in darker condition as you try to keep 1/500 sec. shutter speed minimum (though 1/1000 sec. is more ideal at 500mm focal length on DX.) Then again perhaps a next gen D300s replacement might help you in this regard. If I were Barry, I'd look into used market for an AFS 300mm f2.8 and add 1.4TC as needed.</p>

<p>..darn double post!</p>

<p>Wilson - that is a great idea. I'm having a hard time finding something with good image quality at the long range. Thanks!</p>

<p>Barry i have the 50-500 and find it to be a good lens provided you have ample light .A mono pod or tripod will save the arm muscles .bang for buck you cant go wrong .</p>