Nikon 200-500 VS Sigma 150-600 Sport "Real World Review"
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 09. 2024
- Click Here to read the full article, download 10 RAW Files and see the Full Res exported images. froknowsphoto.c...
Nikon 200-500 F5.6 vs Sigma 150-600 Sport "Real World Review"
When multiple manufacturers make similar lenses, there is always a debate as to which one is better. This time around I took the Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6 and the Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Sport edition out for a spin. What better place to test out these mega zooms than to take it to an MLB game. Keep in mind this is just one real world use for these lenses, there are many more but I chose to test them here.
Please Subscribe www.youtube.com...
To connect with FroKnowsPhoto please follow below
froknowsphoto.c... Check out the FroKnowsPhoto Flash Guide.
froknowsphoto.c.... FroKnowsPhoto Beginner Guide
store.froknowsp...
Facebook: / froknowsphoto
Twitter : / froknowsphoto
Rocking the 200-500 + TC14Eiii for wildlife at the moment, and loving it. On the D7200 it's 420-1050mm FF equivalent, which you need for birds far out on the lake or little songbirds that won't let you get near.
I'm contemplating the 200-500 on my D7100.... torn between that and the 150-600mm sport!
@@PCEngineer2007uk same here! I did hear some folks on the internet discuss autofocus problems when above 5.6f for DX format, so was leaning towards the nikon 200-500 , and from there I could upgrade with a 1.4 nikon teleconverter to the +-700mm range. (taking into account the extra stop of loss with the teleconverter you end up at the same 6.3 as the sigma, but for 700mm, is my reasoning ... :) )
@@quintencoucke5805 you're kinda wrong, with a teleconverter on the nikon you end up at f8 and on the sigma it becomes f9, but there is no problem because almost every camera keeps having good autofocus until f8, only on the sigma it is a problem. They have both no autofocus problems, only the sigma has autofocus problems when having a teleconverter on it.
And I'm talking about a 1.4x teleconverter not 1.7 or 2 but those will not work well on both
Great review -- I recently bought the Nikon 200-500 f/5.6, with its latest generation VR, and a couple of days ago the sun came out and I quickly compared it to my 300mm f/2.8 and the older generation VR 200mm f/2 and 500mm f/4 lenses and was amazed how well it stood up. I agree it's not as sharp or as fast as the primes -- but it's very light and very cheap. If your traveling, for example to africa for a safari, I'm putting it in my bag, together with 70-200mm zoom, and a couple of shorter primes - and then deciding what else I can carry. I'm waiting for a sunny day to field test 200-500 against all the longer lenses I own before I make a decision. But in my entirely ill informed view this is a great lens at the price.
After watching this video, I asked my wife for her opinion. She said wider & longer is best...lol
glennskitchen epic comment 😂😂😂
LOL...
glennskitchen hahahahaha
@@CreativeCloudTutorials .
After 5 years...still epic.
You mentioned that the Sigma was hard to zoom, when I hired this lens I had the same problem until I realised that you can actually hold the lens at the end and you can push/pull to zoom. A bit like with the Canon 100-400. Sigma actually recommend zooming in that way. I'm yet to try out the 200-500 but I think it's still going to be a really tough decision between the two.
namboozleUK So true. I use my Sigma to shoot jet fighter and warbirds at air shows, it’s moving in 3D and I only zoom that way: push/ pull
I'm looking to buy the Nikon; hence, the reason I'm watching this vid in 2020. What impresses me more than anything else is you went out to shoot MLB on a day in which Ichiro was pitching. LOL.
Wow the only game Ichiro Suzuki pitched in (1 Inning) ... Rightfielder ... great comparison ... Awesome lenses
most entertaining part of this video was -
"get out of here icloud preferences" ..
i laughed several times watching this
I think that since you used a mono pod to stabilize the sigma and did not use one with the nikon that any comparison of sharpness between them is completely unreliable.
You should be a detective or lawyer :D
I agree 100% percent, I own the Sigma 150-600 C, anytime I use it on a monopod it's almost always better than hand held.
At 1/4000 does that really matter?
@@starwf07 suprised the fro wasn't at 1/8,000
@@starwf07 Exactly, but some people is learning
The Nikon is great value. I think some pictures are sharper on Sigma because it’s 6.3 and has more things on focus, than the 5.6 on Nikon.
First I got the Nikon 200-500 but I was lucky to be able to also extensively try the Sigma Sport as well. Pretty similar performance overall, and agree to what Mr. Polin is saying. Sigma is overall a tad sharper and has better contrast out of the box. AF is similar, maybe the Sigma is just a little more snappier. However, after the first firmware update the Sigma Sport was already clearly ahead of the Nikon 200-500. Since then the Sigma Sport have been updated once or twice and each time the AF speed has become better. The Sigma Sport now beats the Nikon 200-500 clearly in terms of AF speed and also the IQ is a tad better. The versatility and pro quality of the Sigma is awesome. Since then I have sold the 200-500 and never looked back. Sorry Nikon, Sigma wins this one for sure. My favourite lens however is still the 600mm prime from Nikon.
Could you show some pics of yours with your Sigma please? i'm trying to decide which one i should get! :D
Thank you in advance!
have you ever used the 50-500mm lens from sigma and is there a big difference in sharpness / quality to the 150-600mm sigma lens? Thanks
Dude you got to see the game when Ichiro Suzuki pitched a game! That’s something rare to see!
I have the Sigma 150-600mm Sports. It’s very heavy. I am probably going to buy the Nikon for handholding.
Absolutly...i took contaporary!
i just realized you shot the game where Ichiro was pitching lol nice
Your reviews are always awesome Jared. Keep up the good work.
I've been waiting for a good review & comparison between these 2 lenses, but I would have like to seen some birding and other photos included. Thanks Jared for the near apples to apples!
I'd say they are more for all sports below the top two or three divisions played outside. Mostly I'm thinking school and local fieldsports. Nowadays the town newspaper doesn't have a fulltime staff photographer so they draw from shooters at the game or match and print them. But the shooter tends to be a guy/gal with a good set-up that can nail good images when the sportspeople are predictible.
I suspect the same is true here too. Those lenses won't nab the shot with the ease of a larger maw when the pro-sportspeople do the magic that they get the big bucks for.
I have use the 200-500 today and I think I agree with your comments. I like the weight of the nikon but it does look dull, not much contrast and not sharp when before applying sharpness. Sigma af is suppose to be faster too.
I know you said that AF on the Nikon was good, but another youtuber said it focuses a little slower, can have trouble acquiring focus, and can have trouble re-acquiring if AF lost. Did you encounter that? I shoot sports, wildlife, and birds. Thanks.
Thanks for this, I have mobility issues so your review with the weight etc really helped. Just upgraded to Nikon D7100 and have 18-140mm plus 80-200 and been looking at both of these. May go for the 200-500 for the air displays.
Thank Jarod, There are so few 200-500mm reviews. Much appreciated
.
Maybe the Nikon 300mm PF f4 would be a good compromise. No zoom obviously but price, performance, size and weight makes it a good option...
Thanks, Jared, I've been waiting for this video. I've gone for the Nikon. Primarily because of the weight if I'm honest, especially after hearing your comments regarding quality for both. I climb up and down hills all day when I'm shooting birds and that extra kilo or so makes a difference, and with the price difference I also got a kirk foot for the lens. The extra 100mm reach would be useful but it's far from a deal breaker at these focal lengths. Would love to know at what focal length the Sigma changes to f6.3 though, just out of curiousity
+Alex Alexander Check out the paragraph with the title "Max Aperture": www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-150-600mm-f-5-6.3-DG-OS-HSM-Sports-Lens.aspx
+Jochen Römling Thanks very much for that link.
Iff I need to crop hard to get my results, (Yea, i know, Jarred, you don’t like cropping 😅) there is no way around pixel peeps.
Very interesting and informative video Jared way to go! Could you do a video for fully controlling a manual lens? Meaning a lens with an aperture ring and only manual focus, which a prosumer camera is not able to meter in order to get a correct exposure automatically
Wow - you were able to shoot Ichiro pitching!
Why didn't you compare the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary since it is about the same price and weight of the Nikon?
Hi Jared, I currently own the Sigma 150-600mm Sport lens which has been great but I have been thinking of replacing it with the Canon 500mm F4 IS mark i. I am thinking there may be an advantage when pairing with a 1.4 TC mark iii F4 and 700 at 5.6 is better than 600 at F6.3. Scotland doesn't always have a lot of Sun so good light for wildlife is always a challenge. Do you think the older canon is possibly sharper and would produce a slightly better image?
Nice review! Still deciding between sigma sports or contemporary version... Which one will you buy?
Both excellent lenses. If you need more focal lenght, buy Sigma. If you need a fixed aperture, by Nikon. The small differences are depending on the calibration of cameras and lenses. Even two Nikon D4s are not equally calibrated.
Thx for that Video from Germany. I Love the fair comparison u give
These are great but no weather sealing makes it a difficult decision to buy them if you're going on a safari tour or something like that. All that dust...
when I bought my big sig, the nikon was not available yet. however, the stabilization at slow shutter speeds is incredible! took a great portrait inside at 1/15th at 600mm that was very good. yes it is heavy, so GO TO THE GYM!
lol and more lol
Love my Sigma Sport!
Sigma does a good job at night photos
Thom Hogan about the Nikon 200-500mm compared to Sigma or Tamron: ''I haven’t had nearly as much experience with either the Tamron or Sigma as I have with the Nikkor, but one thing I clearly noted almost immediately was that the 200-500mm was sharper, especially as you moved out towards the corners. On my D7200 (DX body) the 200-500mm can be considered pretty darned sharp edge to edge. I can’t say that for the Tamron or Sigma I used, both of which were showing some clear issues in the DX corners and even seemed a bit less contrasty in the central area. Indeed, like many recent Nikkors, the 200-500mm just seems “well behaved.” It’s difficult to find an optical fault with it under actual use conditions: it just delivers sharp, contrasty, artifact free images most of the time. Vignetting isn’t bad at 500mm f/5.6, either. Nikon’s created a real winner in the 200-500mm f/5.6''
Now I'm super curious about how the contemporary sigma would hold up next to the Nikon for a bang-for-your-buck comparison. Very cool video review!
+Nicholas McClay The contemporary is pretty much identical to the sport in image quality, maybe even a hair better in the sample I was trying. The sport has faster focus and some more small features, like being able to lock zoom at multiple locations in the range instead of just the end. The collar is removable on the contemporary, but not on the sport.
A little late to the party. I played around with the Contemporary today and it locks at all the marked focal lengths just like the Sport.
I believe the sport has better weather sealing also.
The significance of capturing ichiro pitching is understated.
thank you for the dngs FRO youve always been very generous unlike other photographers
Love your videos. Thank you.
I have a Nikon D5600 and the 70-300mm Nikkor lens.
I do mostly bird photography as a hobby including those small warblers.
I want to upgrade my equipment, but dont know if I should change the body (D750, or?) or the 200-500.
Thoughts?
Lens, definitely a new lens. Then a new body.
Go for D500 with 200-500 f/5.6 E ED which is the best combo for Birding!
Glass glass glass
That comparison didn't help me decide between the two. The review was too indecisive. Pixel peeping D4S files are much different than the D500 I'm considering.
Dude, great review. To the point and non-bias. Appreciate it. You have helped me choose based on what is more of an importance to me. Thanks again!
Thanks for a great review.
Based on your video, I bought the Nikon and am very happy with it.
I chose Nikon bec of:
1. Price
2. Weight
3. Its a Nikon. I have had Quality Control issues with Sigma lenses.
I had a Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 DG APO and the image quality was terrible.
I had returned it for exchange twice and this one was the least terrible of the three.
But still unacceptable.
Will never buy a Sigma again.
Curious. What technique did you use to get the exact same photograph from two different cameras simultaneously? You had another person shooting the other camera, saying 123 go? You had the two cameras set up on a tripod with a dual mount head and you could pivot them simultaneously?
+Jared Polin Thanks for the videos! Great content
Is there gonna be review of the Epson P600? You already did the unboxing
Or a video with that one vs the Canon Pixma Pro 10 you did previously?
Thanks Afrojared, what great info on these lenses, I will go with Nikon, :)
I m begginor I have Canon 80d
Can I use Nikon 200-500 mm lense for my Canon 80d
cricket world of course no 😂
What do you think which is sharper or more useful? Is the Sigma 150-600 Sport or the Tamron 150-600 G2?
Jared, I think you should try the Nikon some other time. The lighting was poor which was the obvious reason for staying at 5.6 but I have seen super tact sharp images with that lens that have mistaken me for being taken with prime lenses. The 200-500 is extremely sharp and in comparisons with a 500mm f4, there was almost no difference unless you actually zoomed in 1:1 and even then it wasn't that much of a difference which blew me away. That lens just like most lenses aren't going to be tact sharp at 5.6 also combined with a high ISO.
Pitcher foot focus, in the Nikon your not completely focused on the pitchers body, the mound's dirt is focused behind the pitchers foot, 5.6-6.0 its not that much of a difference, should of re-shot the Nikon lens if your that technical with the sharpness.
Remember its not just the lens it's also the shooter.
Overall nice review Jared!
i have the tamron 150-600 and love it wanted the sigma but at the time it wasnt out
i would be extremely curious to see a comparison of the Nikkor 600 f4 vs Sigma 150-600 Sport at 600mm and some diaphragms. Of course it wont be a surprise who's best, but..how big is the difference in image quality?
I'll have to look to see what Sigma has in the Art series.
Great job, informative compelling, entertaining. Thanks for sharing your knowledge
This is what Thom Hogan says about the Nikon 200-500mm: From the little that I’ve used the Tamron (200-500mm, 150-600mm) and Sigma (150-600mm) lenses, I’d say that the Nikkor is clearly sharper than the other two in virtually every situation, every focal length, and every part of the frame when shot wide open. That’s particularly true of the extreme corners www.dslrbodies.com/lenses/nikon-lens-reviews/nikon-200-500mm-f56-lens.html
He's paid by Nikon....he would say that. I disagree with real world testing. the 150-600 C is the best of the bunch IMO
I got Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM C (for Canon 6D)
is it good enough for aviation photography?
Do got some tips for camera settings to fit Aviation photography with that lens?
Thanks!
+Anthony Hershko these were all taken with the Sport version: www.flickr.com/photos/andrew-hawkes/albums/72157653793193904 there is EXIF data on the images too.
+namboozleUK Thank you so much!!! Amazing pictures!! Last question, what camera settings do you recommend at night aviation photography? (I'm not using a tripod).
Thanks!
+namboozleUK wow great job :D
Can we just ignore the quality for a sec and look at how amazing those photos are? I mean, I’m just a teenager and I’m stuck taking photos of anything interesting in the city with a 28-135mm kit lens
I'm a bit late, but the nikon 50mm 1,8 D is super sharp and one of the cheapest lenses of the market (recently got mine for 70€)
One thing you didn’t mention is weather housing. I know the Sigma sport has this but I have been unable to definitively work out what level of weather housing the Nikon has - it has a rubber seal on the mount but otherwise nothing specific is mentioned. Can you clear that up Jared?
I think he misses the point. I tried both with D500 (indoors sport). Nikon always hit the spot, Sigma not. Thats the price for reverse engineering.
Don't forget the Tamron 150-600 which is a great lens;)
No.
G2!
G2 is at same image quality as C but same price as S
What about the sigma 150-500mm f5-6.3 sport it weighs 3.9 pounds and it’s damn sharp especially on f8.
Sir, please review for the image quality for the image quality of Nikon 200-500mm on my APS-C sensor camera nikon D5300. Is it worth buying over Tamron G2 150-600?
How much of an issue is the weight ? I’d like to shoot wildlife and sports. Is the weight really an obstacle?
Hello Jared , please compare Nikon 200-500 with Tamron 150-600 g2 that would be very useful info.
idk but the specs on th 1dx are better for the d4s nikon it is the best but i am obviously a canon fanboy but of all (high end sports) camera's you can't beat the 1dx
the price on the d4s is better but why wouldn't you use the 7d markII the specs except the fullframe and iso are similar but a lot of people like the cropt sensor for sports and wildlife and it is almost a fourth of the d4s
nikon doesn't really have something 10 fps or higher in that price range
I've never seen a camera that can get anywhere near the Nikon D4s in clarity at high ISOs.
+291xMac There is no point defending a camera that is 1-2 years younger than the Dx and only beats it by high ISO clarity lol.
+TheSirab1 I look closely at ISO clarity because I do so much low light action (fire scene, indoor sports etc.). I think cannons are excellent cameras. I just got a nikon first and had it for so long that I have accumulated lenses for it, so now I'm pretty locked in. Like I said, I prefer nikon for my stuff, cannon is good for other stuff.
+daan stam because #Jared Polin is comparing the 200-500 Nikon with the 150-600 Sigma.... So, he took the best Nikon camera out there. Make sense, right? There is no equivalent lens for Canon. (A future 200-500 IS has been announced)
If I use it in a entry range or a mid range camera then would the high ISO bring grains to the photo ?
How do you think the Nikon 70-200 with a Nikon 2X teleconverter compares? My biggest struggle is is it worth it to buy a full new lens if a 2x gives me close performance and I obviously still have my 70-200 2.8 on me just needing to pop off the TC.
would you ever try a super zoom camera like canon sx50 it zooms to 1200 mm
What is your honest views of sigma 150 to 500mm sport version? ?
Thanks for your honest and detailed review, very helpful!
Have a question...is there a chance the lenses are not calibrated with the camera? Would Auto Fine Tune help at all with the sharpness?
Thanks for that review. I'm watching cuz my son got the Nikon. I think a problem with the comparison is that the Sigma Sport is their best 150-600 and they're spending more money to get good optics. The comparison shb with the contemporary and the Nikon. Also, they snhb edited.
Jared, did you fine tune the Sigma with the Sigma dock, or just use the lens out of the box?
at f5.6 wouldn't the 70-200 2.8 with a 2x teleconverter be the same?
well I guess a lil less reach...
just wondering if this less would be worth it
JP, what is the difference between the two versions of the Sigma? Sport vs Standard?
The sigma can be used as a push-pull zoom as well, which is MUCH smoother than using the zoom ring.
Nice work Jared, what does the Sigma look like on your D5 or the Nikon 200-500 on the D5. (yea loved that review) With that combo, the ISO is no longer an issue. Would you still pick the Sigma or have you Also looked a the Tamron 150-600 G2. I know good glass is everything but I would rather have the camera (D5) and my D810 be one of the larger factors. I shoot indoors in a lot of low light situations with Symphonies, Operas and other musical events where the light is crap. I currently use a Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 but at time need longer reach and the better camera can save me a ton on glass. I would rather rent the better glass when truly needed. I am also looking at pairing the Nikon 24-120 f/4 VRG I am not sure you have looked at that yet. I will poke around at your other reviews. Thanks again for all the hard work.
Stan
Porque não comparou as qualidades das objetivas nikkor com a sigma numa mesma dslr e ambas lado a lado e os resultados das fotos uma do lado da outra e os vídeos meio a meio ou seja 50% da tela mostrando a nikkor e 50% mostrando a sigma ? deixou a desejar este comparativo ! esperava mais de você !
Those images look amazing! How did you edit them to get such a fantastic contrast? When I'm working with the contrast slider or the curves, I somehow always seem to either blow out the highlights or loose all of the detail in the shadows. Or both :/
+overTIMe hmmmm, in lightroom. You can download the RAW files and see my edits as the are saved inside the DNG.
Jared Polin Oh alright. I wasn't aware that I could also open these with the edits in my Photoshop Elements (unfortunatly, as a student with quite a tight budget, I don't own Lightroom yet, but I also don't want to pirate it)
.
Ty for all of your videos!
+overTIMe lrn2torrent homie
Eric Sangimino Just a question, can you read? I do not want to pirate it
I can read. Still said because I don't care.
What about Tamron 150-600 f/5-6.3 VC lens, how is it compared to these two lenses?
Nice vid , whats the actual magnification on that lens?
Sigma is 150-600mm, Nikon is 200-500mm.
hey Jarod, i find very useful having a long range. that is why i got a 2x tele-conveter on my 70-200 f/2.8 becoming 400 mm f/5.6. Is it the same quality. or do you think i shoudl get the 200-500 When i bought tele-conveter the lens was not there in the market... your insight is appreciated...
+Marcos Enrique II Ruiz Rivero (Aviel is Superguide) I tried this on my Tamron lenses.. No. 2X converter will degrade IQ considerably. I will not use 2X converter. Just not worth it.
great test, thank you for that.
Will we get another Test between nikkor 24-70 vs the new 24-70 VR too? ;) Would be rlyy rly great.
Best regards
Jared... Have you tested the Tamron 150-600 against the Sigma contemporary?
Regards,
Duane
Jared, you don't twist the Sigma, you Push & Pull. Same on the Sigma100-400mm C.
i shoot 100 ISO max on a budget so i am Having a hard time i might have to start painting again .Cool Revile
do you recommend the Sigma 150-600 on the a6000 or the 20-700 g master oss lens on the a6000?
Isn't the Sigma non-sports version pretty much the same lens but without weather sealing and a lighter casing? It's 4 pounds rather than 6 for the sport version. I don't see why the image quality should be different though. What's different in the two that one would be superior to the other?
It has more elements.
It's only one stop. You talk about having to bump up the iso "so much", but it's really just one stop (well for the Nikon anyway), which isn't that big a deal.
When all iam in a confusion ur video helps me.
Will both of these fit the Nikon Z6 with the FTZ adapter?
I understood the sport to have better build quality than the contemporary. No comment on that, which is what probably lead to the increased weight.
whats about tamron 150-600 vs nikon 200-500 in sharpness?pls..
I want to buy lens for D500 and D850 already I have Sigma 150-500 lens
Jared...have you used the Nikon 200-500mm with the D500??
hey Jared one question I'm gonna start sport photography and I'm saving up for the sigma just that where do u go to tale the shots what's it called shot square photographers square or area please answer
Could you please Review the Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2. i have a nikon D 750
Nice unique photos, Ichiro pitching!
Thank you Jared ,,Great video and thanks for the files. I agree the sigma is a tiny bit sharper but I like the Nikon backgrounds better. Ile get the Nikon and save 600$, Thanks again Fro
Buy the Sigma contemporary and Save even more.
excellent idea and video
When can we expect to see the new sigma 60-600mm lens here?
gosh i´m new to photography - like ABSOLUTELY new! this is all really overwhelming WHERE TO START ?! :O