chuck barker Loc: reno nv

I have a d3200 is the differance for this body worth the x-tra $200.00 worth it for the 600??? shooting wild life- birds seascapes with light houses in the distance??? can use your judgement. thanks Chuck.

Ched49 Loc: Pittsburgh, Pa.

For shooting wildlife, the 150-600 brings you a bit closer to the action. Other people might have different alternatives. Good luck.

chuck barker Loc: reno nv

thanks cjcorb

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

The Sigma 150-500mm was the longest range tele-zoom at a fairly affordable price, until Tamron introduced the 150-600mm at a price that was competitive.

Since then Sigma has introduced two 150-600 tele-zooms of their own and is phasing out the 150-500mm (at some significant discounts... around $900).

The Sigma 150-600mm "C" (as in "consumer" ) will be priced similarly to the Tamron... around $1100.

The Sigma 150-600mm "S" (as in "sports" ) is somewhat more stoutly build, durable and sell sealed... and priced about $2000.

There also is Sigma 120-400mm that sells for around $900.

Just ask yourself how much lens you want to haul around.... longer focal length generally means a larger and heavier lens. Also, you'll likely want a sturdy tripod to use with it. Sure, you might handhold it occasionally... But you won't want to do so for very long periods of time. The longer the focal length, the steadier a tripod you will need to use it as effectively as possible. Even with the lenses having stabilization, the typical $200 tripod is unlikely to be steady enough.

OTOH, for small, shy critters such as songbirds, 600mm can be nice to have. There's a saying among birders, "There is no such thing as a 'long enough' lens"... If you have 400mm, you'll want 500mm at times. If you have 500mm, there will be times the subject is just out of reach and you wish you had 600mm. Etc.

On a crop sensor camera such as D3200, 300mm is quite long and 400mm is an extremely long focal length. Of course, 500mm and 600mm are even more extreme. Besides holding them adequately steady, another challenge will be shooting through a lot of atmosphere can make for less than the best quality photos. Sometimes it's better, even necessary to simply get closer... with stalking skills, blinds, attractants, etc... and patience.

For the scenic shots.... some hiking to get closer would be preferable to using an extremely long focal length.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I think the difference is now more than $200 - if you shop ! and yes, it is ! ( for the USB dock alone - if you are talking about the Sigma 150-600 contemporary ) If you are talking about the Tamron, the answer is still yes. But, there is no shame in the Sigma 150-500 !

chuck barker Loc: reno nv

thank you amfoto1 helps me a great deal

chuck barker Loc: reno nv

thank you imagemaster

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Yes.

Bugfan Loc: Toronto, Canada

As I got more into photography I came to learn an interesting lesson. No matter how powerful your flash is, your subject will sometimes be a metre further away. Similarly no matter how long your lens is, there will be subjects just out of range.

So gradually as I could afford it, I always selected the most powerful flash, or the lens with the longest reach. I've never regretted this attitude because it allowed me to get pictures I'd have otherwise missed. Of course the principle still lives, there are subjects just beyond my technology too but it doesn't happen as often as it might have and over the years I've also discovered workarounds.

My vote is for spending the $200 for the extra reach, I think you'll be happy you did. I do wildlife too so I can relate to your question.

But that also raises another question you need to worry about. If cost is no issue, you can get the Sigma f2.8 200-500 mm lens which, with the included TC, will stretch to 1000 mm. There are a few other photographic lenses that are even longer than that and bigger and heavier. The problem with these is that you often need a fork lift to carry them into the bush and a concrete pedestal to hold them up when you get to your location. Physical size and weight are a very big factor too about which long lens to choose.

So I'd suggest visit a camera store and hold each lens mounted on your camera for a while. Can you manage the length and the weight? Can you carry it around for a few hours while following less than optimal trails? Can you hold it steady to take a picture or do you need a heavy tripod which you may also have to be willing to carry?

If the answer is yes then do pick the longest you can afford. And if the answer is no, pick the longest you can manage.

Rowls1 Loc: Florida

I just bought the Sigma 150-500 for $730.00 new, great lens for the price.

oldtool2 Loc: South Jersey

Only you can decide that, not us. If you do a lot of wildlife and birds shooting then you need the longer lens. For the price difference there's no doubt in my mind I would go with the 600.

Jim D

the f/stops here Loc: New Mexico

Chuck, been there and done that ... meaning had the 150-500mm Sigma but now use the 150-600mm Tamron. The Tamron seems to be sharper but the main difference to me is the ergonomics. It may sound silly but the Sigma 150-500 has the focus ring in front of the zoom ring and I always found my hand and fingers on that focus ring preventing the auto-focus from working. Yes, this only occurs when holding the camera by hand and not when it's on a tripod. Tamron reversed the position of the two rings by placing the focus ring behind the zoom ring, toward the camera body. That problem never has happened again. I'm sure folks are going to say the new Sigma 150-600 is better than the Tamron and vise-versa. It's like Nikon vs. Canon or Infinity vs. Lexus. I don't get too involved in those battles, I just go out and capture images. Best, J. Goffe

washy Loc: Dorset UK

I did have the Sigma 150-500 but today I traded it with some pounds for a brand new 150-5600 Tamron which focuses quicker hunts less and is sharper. In my book money well spent and its about the same weight as the Sigma.

washy Loc: Dorset UK

I did have the Sigma 150-500 but today I traded it with some pounds for a brand new 150-600 Tamron which focuses quicker hunts less and is sharper. In my book money well spent and its about the same weight as the Sigma.

romanticf16 Loc: Commerce Twp, MI

Sigma also makes a 300-800 which IS THE lens for wildlife with a FX camera IMHO.