Sigma 150-600: I have a Nikon 7200. I have been thinking of getting the Sigma 150-600 lens. Am I correct in assuming that since my camera body is not waterproof, there would be no...

dragonswing Loc: Pa

I have a Nikon 7200. I have been thinking of getting the Sigma 150-600 lens. Am I correct in assuming that since my camera body is not waterproof, there would be no benefit in getting the more expensive lens that is weather resistant?

Cedge

Would your next camera possibly be weather resistant? Lenses purchases tend to last longer than camera choices, around my place.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

dragonswing wrote:

I have a Nikon 7200. I have been thinking of getting the Sigma 150-600 lens. Am I correct in assuming that since my camera body is not waterproof, there would be no benefit in getting the more expensive lens that is weather resistant?

It depends.
If you plan on staying with the D7200 for the rest of your life, probably there would be no benefit.
If you think that it's possible that at some time in the future you may up-grade your camera body, then buying a weatherproof lens now would be a good idea so you won't need to up-grade the lens later.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

dragonswing wrote:

I have a Nikon 7200. I have been thinking of getting the Sigma 150-600 lens. Am I correct in assuming that since my camera body is not waterproof, there would be no benefit in getting the more expensive lens that is weather resistant?

No DSLR is "Waterproof", there is just no way to make them so.
Your D7200 is "weather sealed", not quite to the level of a D4s, but much better than a D3XXX or D5XXX model which have no weather sealing at all.
The Sigma Sport is a fully weather sealed lens capable of handling pretty extreme weather conditions. The Sigma Contemporary is not weather sealed at all, but a simple solution like the OpTech Rain Sleeve will make it very well weather resistant for very little money.

Jim Bob

Mac wrote:

It depends.
If you plan on staying with the D7200 for the rest of your life, probably there would be no benefit.
If you think that it's possible that at some time in the future you may up-grade your camera body, then buying a weatherproof lens now would be a good idea so you won't need to up-grade the lens later.

Come on, that's an assumption and you know it. You can not reasonably predict whether the poster will need to upgrade the lens in the future. Give me a break.

Jim Bob

MT Shooter wrote:

No DSLR is "Waterproof", there is just n... (show quote)

Exactly right. Can't believe I agreed with Shooter. However, when he's right, he's right.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

Jim Bob wrote:

Come on, that's an assumption and you know it. You can not reasonably predict whether the poster will need to upgrade the lens in the future. Give me a break.

Do you deliberately present yourself as being stupid, or is that just the way you are?

CAS1951 Loc: San Diego

To piggyback on this, I too, am planning on purchasing the same (Sigma Contemporary 150-600) at some point this week--but the Canon version. I have been reading review after review from various sites, and to be honest, I see no sense in buying the Sports version unless you have $$ to burn. Aside from the build (which also adds to the weight), sharpness (as I understand) is minimal between the two. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Thanks!

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

It has to do with the fact the sport has additional elements in the lens and construction compared to the Contemporary lens. It also is dust sealed. It also has a metal housing, not plastic. It all has to do with your budget. The sport will cost you 2x of the contemporary. I use my sigma sport hand held. It is super sharp. I have attached an mage I took this past December in the Everglades. It just won an award at my camera club.

dragonswing wrote:

I have a Nikon 7200. I have been thinking of getting the Sigma 150-600 lens. Am I correct in assuming that since my camera body is not waterproof, there would be no benefit in getting the more expensive lens that is weather resistant?

Sigma 150-600 Sport Hand Held
Sigma 150-600 Sport Hand Held...

Jim Bob

Mac wrote:

Do you deliberately present yourself as being stupid, or is that just the way you are?

Look in the mirror. The answer will be staring you in the face.

Jim Bob

CAS1951 wrote:

To piggyback on this, I too, am planning on purchasing the same (Sigma Contemporary 150-600) at some point this week--but the Canon version. I have been reading review after review from various sites, and to be honest, I see no sense in buying the Sports version unless you have $$ to burn. Aside from the build (which also adds to the weight), sharpness (as I understand) is minimal between the two. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Thanks!

You would be correct.

CAS1951 Loc: San Diego

Beautiful photo, Stan! I have to admit, I had been going back and forth between the Sport and Contemporary. I decided to go with actually two lenses--Canon's 70-300mm IS L lens (as I found I could handhold without any problems), and the Sigma Contemporary because it is lighter. I'm older, so, I will have to use a tripod (and will also have to purchase a new tripod head to accommodate the lens and camera). The weight was too much for me (Sports) and I know the trade-off is the build, but I have read that the sharpness is minimal (obviously, the Sport will be sharper). I suspect I will be using the 70-300mm more often than the Sigma anyway, but I wanted all of my bases covered--so, I am opting for the Contemporary. Of course, if someone can give me a compelling reason to go with the Sport, my mind can be changed (which is why I'm waiting a couple of days).

Thank you so much for your input. It IS appreciated,

CAS1951 Loc: San Diego

Thank you, Jim Bob!

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Rent both lenses. You will see a difference in sharpness at 600. The Sport has different optics.

CAS1951 wrote:

To piggyback on this, I too, am planning on purchasing the same (Sigma Contemporary 150-600) at some point this week--but the Canon version. I have been reading review after review from various sites, and to be honest, I see no sense in buying the Sports version unless you have $$ to burn. Aside from the build (which also adds to the weight), sharpness (as I understand) is minimal between the two. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Thanks!

Jim Bob

PixelStan77 wrote:

Rent both lenses. You will see a difference in sharpness at 600. The Sport has different optics.

Not sure how you can say what someone else will see no more than I could say what you would feel or smell.