# PhotoZone Review: Sigma 150-600 C



## ahsanford (Jul 14, 2017)

Have at it:

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/1009-sigma150600f563c?start=1

Bummed to see PZ only test at 50 MP now. They had been running a 21 MP FF rig (I think a 1DS3?) _and _the 5DS R, which I enjoyed comparing the output from. Now it's only the 50 MP option.

- A


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 14, 2017)

The testing at 50MP gives us a idea as to the limits of performance we can expect, the numbers look pretty good for someone with a MK III, like you, I wonder if there is a lot of difference.

I can remember just a few years ago when 3rd party lenses were much poorer, did not have IS, only a handful were highly desirable lenses. So, in that regard, you get a lot more for your dollar.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 14, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The testing at 50MP gives us a idea as to the limits of performance we can expect, the numbers look pretty good for someone with a MK III, like you, I wonder if there is a lot of difference.
> 
> I can remember just a few years ago when 3rd party lenses were much poorer, did not have IS, only a handful were highly desirable lenses. So, in that regard, you get a lot more for your dollar.



Sure -- if you are only going to test one, test at 50. I just was hoping the 1Ds/5D2/5D3-ish 21MP value might stick around a bit further. 

It's not like Photozone was stuck in the dark ages, only reporting testing on a 21-22 MP rig. (Like LensTip. )

- A


----------



## AlanF (Jul 14, 2017)

Photozone itself tells us not to take their MTF values seriously for telephotos. But, it is even worse than that. ePhotozine have produced their MTF charts, with very different takes on sharpness across the frame, with very good edge sharpness throughout the focal length range.
https://www.ephotozine.com/article/sigma-150-600mm-f-5-6-3-dg-os-hsm-contemporary-review-27247
Compare this with Photozone, which has soft edges
Take the measurements with a very large pinch of salt.

The best advice for comparing the Tamron with the Sigma C comes from Lensrentals, of course:
"You can probably tell the Sigma has a slightly better MTF, but I’ll put them side-by-side below for easier comparison. I suspect that even if we stopped the Tamron down to f/6.3 the Sigma would be slightly better in the lab, but I also doubt the difference is nearly as great as the copy-to-copy variation. In other words, I wouldn’t consider MTF to be a significant factor when deciding between these two lenses. Things like how it handles, focuses, and how well the stabilization works are going to be way more important."
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?action=post;topic=33031.0;last_msg=674993

edit: corrected URL


----------



## -1 (Jul 14, 2017)

AlanF said:


> Photozone itself tells us not to take their MTF values seriously for telephotos. But, it is even worse than that. ePhotozine have produced their MTF charts, with very different takes on sharpness across the frame, with very good edge sharpness throughout the focal length range.
> https://www.ephotozine.com/article/sigma-150-600mm-f-5-6-3-dg-os-hsm-sports-lens-review-26786
> 
> Compare this with Photozone, which has soft edges
> Take the measurements with a very large pinch of salt.



ePhotozine.com has tested the "Sport" version. Photozone.com has that one tested here:

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/977-sigma150600f563sports?start=1

The new test posted is of the "Contemporary"! version:

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/1009-sigma150600f563c?start=1

The "Sport" seem to be way better...


----------



## AlanF (Jul 14, 2017)

-1 said:


> The "Sport" seem to be way better...



That's not what Photozone themselves say about their own tests:
" Its bigger cousin, the Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports, is, of course, a little better across the range so if you can tolerate its heavy-weight and higher price tag, it is the superior lens. However, they aren't worlds apart either and the Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary is really a steal for the money."


----------



## -1 (Jul 14, 2017)

AlanF said:


> -1 said:
> 
> 
> > The "Sport" seem to be way better...
> ...


No, but I usually look at data and ggraphs myself when interpretating a test and that that i see is that the Sport is way better at the long end and that's where these lenses lives most of their lives:

Sport vs Contemporary:













Source: Photozone.com as previously linked.


----------



## 9VIII (Jul 14, 2017)

TDP results show the 150-600 Sport being significantly sharper as well, I've always thought it odd that no-one seems to mention that lens.

I bet if Sigma were to release that exact lens formula today, only with a cheaper and lighter plastic body, it would probably generate a ton of positive press.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 14, 2017)

-1 said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > -1 said:
> ...



I read all the reviews, not one or two, and then test the lens I buy carefully (courtesy of the local store). Sure, you guys who look at one site and buy their lenses based on that one review deserve the lens you get. 
Here is a link to a site where someone has tested both the Contemporary and Sport carefully:

https://improvephotography.com/36962/sigma-150-600mm-sport-vs-contemporary-lens-review/

and finds his copies of virtually identical sharpness and writes:

"I was so surprised by my results that even after testing and retesting, I read reviews from a few other reviewers who I respect and it looks like I'm not the only one who has found that these lenses have almost identical sharpness. Some of the reviewers I found said they felt the Sport had an very slight edge in sharpness, and others felt, as I did, that the Contemporary was just barely sharper. This isn't terribly surprising. Each copy of a lens performs differently, so to see some slight variation is normal."


----------

