jackerayc Loc: Southeast Texas

I saw this lens while looking for one with a little more reach than my 55-300 am trying to determine if this would be a good addition to my Nikon D5100.

Sigma 50-500mm F/4-6.3 APO D EX HSM (N90S & Later) Autofocus Lens For Nikon {86}

Any thoughts or info on whether it would work well with my camera?

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Sorry, my opinion of that lens is not good. I would stay away from it. I know the price might be inviting but that's the only plus.
I have used the Nikon 200-500 5.6 and for the cost it is one of, if not the best lens for the price point on the market today.
It may be a little over your budget, but if you can swing it, you will not be disappointed. Trust me.
Some folks say it is a heavy lens, but in comparison to my Nikon 600 f4, it is a light weight. I hand hold the 200-500 lens when shooting birds in flight, in between shots I either turn the tripod arm up and carry it with one hand, or I cradle it in my arms, I am 72 years old and I have no issues holding it for hours.

ELNikkor

"Swim away! Swim away!"

SkyKing Loc: Thompson Ridge, NY

...the newer one has a better rating...they both seem to be good at the short end but run into trouble at the high end...the newer one has lower levels of distortion...the Sigma Sport 150-600 is usually the one being recommended...?

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

I found this lens to be awkward and not very sharp. It was a pain to use. I eventually got the Sigma 150-600 C and think it is great for wildlife. It is not the easiest lens to handle because of its focal length but it is sharp optically and focuses fast.

LarryFB Loc: Depends where our RV is parked

Your D5100 requires F/5.6 to auto focus. So you may have focusing issues at 500mm.

markinvictoria Loc: Victoria TX

I used this lens for years...on a D50, D90, D7000 and D7100. I loved the range...50 to 500 was awesome...and at the time it was the 'best bang for the buck' to get to 500mm. For me it was pretty much a tripod lens since it didn't have 'Optic Stabilization'. When I did my part the lens would deliver. After the lens was well out of warranty...it developed some play in the barrel. I sent it in to Sigma for a quote...never got the quote...but they returned the lens in like new condition...no charge. Since then I've moved on to the Nikon D500 with the 200-500. That was before Sigma came out with the 60 to 600 which would have been tempting.

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

I don't know your budget (and you know folks here will help you spend lot's of money) or technical photo capabilities, or even what you intend to shoot. You will hear good and bad about the older large zooms, but there are still some good copies and some good "deals" to be found, even in the pandemic price gouging market....you just have to "shop well".

Before we go further; Yes there are better lenses (billnikon pointed to a winner) but you have to be ready to "Pay the Piper" for those. If you are a casual shooter or on a tight budget - that will guide you somewhat, or if a serious amateur, or Pro, you would want to spend more. However, with a decent copy of the Bigma, you can make some fine "wall hangers", it just takes some effort and rounding that "learning curve". These early F4-6.3 Non-stabilized models can be a great entry into the "big ole lens" market, just don't spend a fortune on it!

I have one in Sony A-mount and it works well with my gear. Not the latest and greatest and not the newest, but the lens will make good photos once you learn to use it to the best of it's (and your) ability. I also have the Tamron Gen 1 150-600 for my Nikon gear, and it is newer, has a bit more reach, stabilized, and mine is a good/sharp shooter and I'm very happy with it. Also have an old 170-500 Sigma, and many folks "pooh Pooh" those, but again, with some effort and good technique it will make good quality photos - yes it takes more effort, but I can make fine shots with it as well - No, it's not my favorite, but it will work when I do my part, and it is softer than some others at 500, so you back off a bit...it is much better at 450...... Another Sigma I have is the 120-400 OS, 135-400 too, so I have spent some time with the big ole Sigma lenses.

Back to the 50-500 "Bigma"....since no stabilization you will need to shoot well supported, in good light and use faster shutter speeds and or higher ISO or ISO Float in some situations.

I'm not so quick to discount older large zoom lenses....as I have found that they too have a user learning curve, require some effort to overcome the lack of stabilization, so a lot of folks do not want to put the effort into the technique needed to get the best out of these big honkin lenses. The Bigma also appears to suffer some from the "good copy/bad copy" label, so if you do decide to go for one, buy from a place where you can return it if not happy, or at least have some guarantee of recourse if not happy. Test the lens well when you get it, and then make your "keep it or send it back decision". Another method would be to borrow one, or find a camera shop (I know, that is getting harder and harder) that has one you can try.

Compared to the Nikon 55-300 VR, I don't think you will be unhappy (with a good Bigma copy), as in my experience compared with the 55-300, the Bigma is at least as sharp (my Bigma is as sharp as my 55-300 VR was, I sold it sometime back - didn't use it), at full 500mm zoom probably even. Also noticed that some of the big zooms come up a tad short on stated reach, some say really more like a 460-475, but I don't find that an issue that warrants any real concern. And on the Sony I can turn on Clear Image Zoom and easily go out to 2x, as long as I don't mind Jpeg only output.

Price: The Pandemic has changed the used market quite a bit, and the prices have been rising steadily, inventory starting to dry up somewhat....so do some "hard shopping" and definitely look for retuirn capability and a warranty (if possible). I would love to give you a good price range, but would say to try and stay under $325-350 for the older unstabilized versions.

Sharpness: Many of the big lenses (zooms) fall-off somewhat at the long end...seems (from my exp) to be variable from copy to copy....and that is the reason I say buy from someone/someplace where you can try first, or easily return if unhappy.

If you are a casual shooter, or even somewhat serious telephoto shooter, with good technique you can make great photos with the Bigma. AND, it is called the Bigma for a reason, it is a big ole lens, and it get's heavy handheld for any length of time (not a back-breaker, but it will get heavy over the course of the day, or afternoon). If you look into forum photos all over the web, you will find many many excellent photos taken with the Bigma...it is possible!!

This is just my user opinion, my $.02 on the subject. as always, YMMV. If you have any questions feel free, I'll share what I've experienced with the aformentioned gear. Good luck and have fun!!

zenagain Loc: Pueblo CO

Had this lens for awhile. Absolute waste of money. Also had the 150-500 os, a little better but still did not like it. I used them on a D5200 and a D7100. Now have the Tamron 150-600 g2. Love it. Use it on a D7200 and sometimes on a D810.
The sigma 50-500 has a long history of disapointment.

Bill McKenna

I think you'll find the Sigma 60-600 f/4.5-6.3 to be a much better lens, with a lot of good feedback.

RogLev

I use the Sigma 50-500mm (4/3 lens mount) on a Olympus M1 marklll with an adapter and I am very pleased with it. Admittedly it's a bit heavy and usually I need a tripod. I had a Tamron 150-600 A-11 for the Nikon D500 before I upgraded to the Olympus system and comparing images between both systems, I don't think I lost any quality with the Sigma lens. Price was a big factor in selecting the Sigma lens.

Rod Andreoff

Tried it. Sent it back. Did not come up to the same standards of IQ that the other sigma zooms.

rick_n_wv Loc: Charleston WV

I used this lens for several years. I got better quality at 475-480 than at 500 but had to zoom in to really see it. Are the new lens sharper,you bet, but not so much at the time. It was popular and a good copy gave good results. When I got a canon 100-400 and 1.4 i put it in the cabinet and it is still there. Noticeable quality jump and a big notable cost difference. Today's software can help with sharpness but your base image will still be soft. All that said look at the lens that are big sellers from any manufacturer. High end super sharp lens are not on their top sellers list. Only you know satisfied you will be. It will give you good results but not "count the hair on a flies head" sharp.

RowdyRay Loc: MN

The Sigma 50-500mm is not that great of lens. If you are trying to get more reach on a budget, look at the Sigma 150-500mm. Not sure why others poo-poo'd this lens. I use it on my d7100 with great results. A professional photographer friend of mine was really impressed with the shots I showed him. And no, I am not very good at editing. Gave me grief for buying it because, I was saving up for the sport. But, I stumbled upon it for 300.00. Let him use it on his d500 and he was shocked at the results. He's got some very expensive primes. A little slower focusing than the newer lenses but, the OS isn't bad. Think most of it is setting up your camera correctly. He did give me a lot of advice to get those results. Won't sell it because, sometimes you just don't need that much reach, but want to travel lighter. I can deal with it's faults.

Yes, my Sigma 150-600mm sport is much faster and sharper, but it was also 4 times the price. And, almost twice the weight. I have the Tamron 150-600mm G1 lens for my Canon system. Nice lens but, hear the G2 is even better. Again, a lot more money and weight. Same with many of the lenses in the same category.

The OP hasn't specified a budget or if he/she has weight issues.