rspmd23
Loc: NYC , now in Westlake, Florida
I know the Sport version is highly regarded for its build quality , but is there enough improvement in image quality over the Contemporary to warrant the investment ?
rspmd23 wrote:
I know the Sport version is highly regarded for its build quality , but is there enough improvement in image quality over the Contemporary to warrant the investment ?
https://improvephotography.com/36962/sigma-150-600mm-sport-vs-contemporary-lens-review/So when it comes right down to it, after hours of testing and reviewing many many many photos, the sharpness is almost identical between the two lenses. If I had to pick a winner in the sharpness battle, it'd be the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary, which had better contrast at several focal lengths and better resolution at one focal length. All the other tests were a tie.
I recently rented the Sport loved it. The only drawback is it’s weight. Focus is fast. I shot Eagles on the Mississippi River. Results were great. I ended up buying the Comtemporary. The reason was the 2 pound weight difference and the price almost 1/2 of the Sport. I can’t really see a difference in the performance of the 2. If I were using the lens in trying conditions I would buy the Sport.
rspmd23
Loc: NYC , now in Westlake, Florida
Thanks. Think I’ll save my money
I own both lenses; the Contemporary in Nikon mount and the Sport in Canon mount. Unless money is not a concern or you need the rugged construction of the Sport, just go with the Contemporary. I use it on my D500 all the time and have nothing bad to say about it.
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
rspmd23 wrote:
I know the Sport version is highly regarded for its build quality , but is there enough improvement in image quality over the Contemporary to warrant the investment ?
If your shooting Nikon, the answer is NO, DON'T DO IT. Buy the Nikon 200-500 instead. You will be happy.
PixelStan77 wrote:
https://improvephotography.com/36962/sigma-150-600mm-sport-vs-contemporary-lens-review/
So when it comes right down to it, after hours of testing and reviewing many many many photos, the sharpness is almost identical between the two lenses. If I had to pick a winner in the sharpness battle, it'd be the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary, which had better contrast at several focal lengths and better resolution at one focal length. All the other tests were a tie.
Yep. You're exactly right.
billnikon wrote:
If your shooting Nikon, the answer is NO, DON'T DO IT. Buy the Nikon 200-500 instead. You will be happy.
I love my Nikon 200-500, but I regularly come across people who claim that either the Tamron or Sigmas are better. Plenty say the Nikon beats all. I think you have to just be happy with what you have if it's performing well for you. You'll get different opinions on everything, from focussing speed and accuracy to sharpness. Unless you have money to test out all four, you will never come to a real consensus from online reviews and opinions. Even then there seems to be some sample variation in some or all of them.
Other tests and reviews have considered the Tamron 150-600mm G2 to be comparable to the Sigma Sport in image quality, but over 2 lbs lighter, and around $500-600 "lighter" as well!..I considered the Nikon 200-500, and I felt its zoom be too short in range, and the lens itself too heavy as well..I chose the Tamron to couple with my Nikon D500 over a year ago, and have had no reason to quibble or have buyer's remorse on either the camera or the lens!
I have the Sigma Contemporary one and I am not sure about it yet
my pics are coming out blurry but it could be just me for one thing to me it is quite heavy and i had the sigma 150 to 500 before and i did not think that was to bad
Maybe if it ever warms up and i can get out and start taking pics with it i will like it better
rspmd23 wrote:
I know the Sport version is highly regarded for its build quality , but is there enough improvement in image quality over the Contemporary to warrant the investment ?
Your intended use, and frequency thereof, should dictate what you do. Why not rent one and see how you like it?
billnikon wrote:
If your shooting Nikon, the answer is NO, DON'T DO IT. Buy the Nikon 200-500 instead. You will be happy.
Ahh I think he’s talking about sigma lens not Nikon focus buddy focus
You might also want to consider the additional weight.
rspmd23 wrote:
I know the Sport version is highly regarded for its build quality , but is there enough improvement in image quality over the Contemporary to warrant the investment ?
I don't agree at all. If you are involved with wildlife photography, the sport is clearly sharper, and importantly a lens that spends it's working hours outdoors in the elements benefits greatly from the seals incorporated in the sport version. Also, the additional element (diminished aberration) and antireflective coatings also matter.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.