Nikon 200-400mm F4 VS Sigma 150-600mm S: These two owl photos were taken with the two lens mentioned. What I see as the major difference is the creamy background in the Nikon lens...

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

These two owl photos were taken with the two lens mentioned. What I see as the major difference is the creamy background in the Nikon lens verses the Sigma lens.

Taken with Nikon 200-400mm F4

(Download)

Taken with Sigma 150-600mm S

(Download)

ebbote Loc: Hockley, Texas

Honestly they are about equal with the Nikon just a little bit better and a little less noise, both are very good shots.

Bob Yankle Loc: Burlington, NC

Lucky you Bruce. Two lens that a lot of people would like to have in their camera bag, and you have both. They both seem to do good jobs on owls.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Brucej67 wrote:

These two owl photos were taken with the two lens mentioned. What I see as the major difference is the creamy background in the Nikon lens verses the Sigma lens.

Its really hard to do an exact comparison because of the different shooting conditions. Both look quite good though.
My experience with these same two lenses shows me very comparable results. The only real significant difference I have seen between them is that the Nikon focuses a little faster when shooting moving objects. Clearly an advantage of the faster aperture of that lens.

wingclui44 Loc: CT USA

Brucej67 wrote:

These two owl photos were taken with the two lens mentioned. What I see as the major difference is the creamy background in the Nikon lens verses the Sigma lens.

Both are very nice images.
The Nikon 200-400mm f4.0 AF-s is always my dream lens, but no way i can afford it. i won't even think about the third party count part. Besides the IQ, I wonder if the Sigma can live up with the Nikon on the built quality and the durability.
On my case, I end up getting the cheaper Nikon 300mm f4.0 D AF-s IF and a 1.4x converter. i am very happy with that.

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

Thank you Bob, I have a very understanding wife and stretched my savings to get them.

Bob Yankle wrote:

Lucky you Bruce. Two lens that a lot of people would like to have in their camera bag, and you have both. They both seem to do good jobs on owls.

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

You are quite right MT, both of these lenses are superb with the Sigma a little cheaper, but the build quality on the Sigma is superb. I had the opportunity on both lenses to shoot the owls when they were flying, however I am old, out of shape and to slow in the panning to get them on the wing.

MT Shooter wrote:

Its really hard to do an exact comparison because of the different shooting conditions. Both look quite good though.
My experience with these same two lenses shows me very comparable results. The only real significant difference I have seen between them is that the Nikon focuses a little faster when shooting moving objects. Clearly an advantage of the faster aperture of that lens.

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

I can't speak for the Sigma Contemporary since I own the Sports version, but I can say for this lens it measures up to any situation you can throw at it and the build quality is outstanding. There is a learning curve with using all lenses especially these professional versions, but once you have mastered them you will never regret it.

wingclui44 wrote:

Both are very nice images.
The Nikon 200-400mm f4.0 AF-s is always my dream lens, but no way i can afford it. i won't even think about the third party count part. Besides the IQ, I wonder if the Sigma can live up with the Nikon on the built quality and the durability.
On my case, I end up getting the cheaper Nikon 300mm f4.0 D AF-s IF and a 1.4x converter. i am very happy with that.

merrytexan Loc: georgia

Brucej67 wrote:

These two owl photos were taken with the two lens mentioned. What I see as the major difference is the creamy background in the Nikon lens verses the Sigma lens.

i think owl vote on the first hooter...very nice shots bruce!

FramerMCB Loc: Northern, ID (formerly Portland, OR area)

Great shots both! The difference in bokeh is more than likely due to the two-stop difference between the lenses: f4.0 vs. f6.3 (or maybe that's just a stop-and-a-half?). Still, makes for part of the difference, if not most of it. The further from the subject the less difference there will be in this regard...
Happy shooting with your new lens!

sailorsmom Loc: Souderton, PA

Great shots, Bruce!