Sigma lens question
Feb 14, 2013 05:43:58 #
I found this lens...Sigma 170-500mm Zoom Lens for $350 bucks. My question is now that Sigma has improved on the quality...as good as or sometimes passing OEM lens's what manufactured date should you consider when looking at used Sigma lens's?
Feb 14, 2013 06:18:21 #
The old NON IS sigma was utter CARP.
I had one.
I have had NO problems with the newer 120-400, 150-500 IS lenses, sorry but I would touch no sigma tele that is not the newer IS version
The 170-500mm predates Sigma's HSM ring motor, instead relying on the screw-drive for autofocus. As such, autofocus produces a fair amount of noise, especially when the lens is running through its full focal range.
I had one.
I have had NO problems with the newer 120-400, 150-500 IS lenses, sorry but I would touch no sigma tele that is not the newer IS version
The 170-500mm predates Sigma's HSM ring motor, instead relying on the screw-drive for autofocus. As such, autofocus produces a fair amount of noise, especially when the lens is running through its full focal range.
Feb 14, 2013 08:47:42 #
Feb 15, 2013 07:29:07 #
Most of the newer Sigma lenses have OS and AF. If you don't require either, then the older Sigma lenses may do you well. I have some older Sigma lenses that I wouldn't replace with OS, simply because they perform so well without. I also do not use AF.
Feb 15, 2013 07:42:47 #
I just sold a sigma 70-300 DL macro with AF...and was an ok lens...but the optics just never did measure up to get a really clear photo. Maybe a bad copy..i'm not sure. The new'r sigma lens I hear have greatly improved...just not sure when..and what to look for when I do go shopping later this year. I'm leaning towards the 150-500.
Feb 15, 2013 13:59:20 #
Bret wrote:
I just sold a sigma 70-300 DL macro with AF...and was an ok lens...but the optics just never did measure up to get a really clear photo. Maybe a bad copy..i'm not sure. The new'r sigma lens I hear have greatly improved...just not sure when..and what to look for when I do go shopping later this year. I'm leaning towards the 150-500.
I have a 150-500 and it's really sharp, although as many have noted here--it's a big, heavy lens. I love mine, and of course defer to the opinion of the Liege of Lenses, MT Shooter who I know can make this lens jump through hoops 8-)
Feb 15, 2013 14:06:40 #
Feb 15, 2013 19:53:25 #
The 170-500 is an earlier much lesser lens. I am thinking 3 years - anything older than 3 has to be very questionable - except the 300 and 400 APO macro's. The 100-300 EX F4 is a great lens even without OS !
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.