I have one of these. It is the perfect airshow lens. You still need a wide angle for the static shots (I use a Z 7 now with the 14-30) but the D500 with this lens gets all the action. All we need now is a bloody airshow!
This lense was my biggest investment so far and I haven't had any regrets since. Its performance on a Nikon D7500 is iust amazing. I am able to shoot Jupiter, Saturn and Venus hand-held so that the planets are visible as disks. On wildlife, the results are tad sharp if you know how to handle the lense; starting with 150 mm you will get a very smooth bokeh. Yes, it is 2.7 kg, but I am rather a big guy. Highly recommended as well!
Great review! Thank you for taking the time. I'm thinking of getting this for the R5 actually, so the end made me laugh a little. Haha, I'm not rich either but did splurg on the R5 recently.
Thank you again for a fantastic review. I'll add it to my wishful thinking list!! Your outro was also fantastic!! When you consider the zoom range it almost seems like a bargain against buying 2 or more to get the same range.
I bought this lens last year and couldnt agree more with this review. Its just so good at wildlife/nature photography, the only issue is safely carrying it during travel
Early sports photographers could probably get some use out of it at 60mm. Ideally you'd have a 70-200 f/2.8 for something that's close enough to need something that wide, but if you have to decide between the wider aperture and the range, I feel like a lot of people would rather the range until they can afford a second body and more lenses.
Used for Sport photography this lens will be very often used at 60-200mm range, just as much as at 200-600mm range, because in many Sports point of interest is moving rapidly toward you and from you. It seems you believe this lens in Wild life lens exclusively, which is clearly not the case.
This came out just after I purchased the 150-600mm sport. Out of the box I was sorely disappointed after spending so much hard earned cash. After spending an afternoon adjusting the focus via in camera micro focus adjustment on my Canon 80D and Canon 5DMk3 I was amazed at the sharpness of that lens and use it frequently, even more than the Canon 100-400mm Mk2.
It's since been its fifth been a full year review of the sigma 60 to 600 mm lens ! This is been a great review , and I have taken the time to read all of the comments made about the Sigma 60 to 600 mm ! Mister Frost you mention that this lens will work well on a aps-c camera ! But is it possible for you to make a review using a aps-c camera adapter to this lens ? I am considering purchasing this lens and trying to adopt it to my aps-c camera ! Thank you !
my next lens will be the sig 150-600mm c, having seen this the extra at wide end would be nice but for the weight and price i think i stick to getting the 150-600c, great review as always
Funnily enough, my particular 150-600C was actually sharper than the 150-600S, Tamron, 150-600, Nikon 200-500, and Sigma 60-600 I compared. I'm not sure if I just encountered particularly bad examples of the other lenses, or a godly C version.
@@giklab Yes, I have seen much worse performance from this 60-600mm. So there seems to be quite a lot of variation in quality. I hope this particular lens is not cherry-picked by Sigma... But even if it is, that's not Christopher's fault.
@@stevess7777 Yes, that's most likely the case. Overall I really like Sigma lenses though. Especially the newer models give really high price-performance.
I'm finding the same results as you, i was shooting it on my 90D (at 33mp) and always finding the sharpness quite lacking at 600mm. but a while back i bought a 6D mark II and found that the sharpness is quite better on the 26mp of this camera. It's funny that everybody is talking about the 150-600 and forgeting about this lens .... i guess it's the price ? at the time that i bought it, it was only 300 euros more than the 150-600 sport ....
Where this lens really shines is that it's one the few camera lenses that is "Parfocal" meaning it retains perfect focus at all zooms levels. A necessity for shooting high-end video. The Sigma 150-600mm sport is NOT PARFOCAL so if you shoot video this is not the sense for you. All Cine Lenses are par focal but Cinema lenses are quite expensive for this reason. Understand that more than 90% of the photography lenses by Canon, Nikon and yes Sony are not parfocal because the cost to make it that way. Some lens come close to being parfocal but be careful because if you are not paying attention you can get burnered by that almost perfect focus. For critical work keep it parfocal. Also even if you are not much of a videographer having the focus still perfect even though you have zoomed in and out is a boon for nature photographers.
Early in 2019 i doubted to get this lens or the 150-600 C. Went for the 150-600, since i already have a 70-200 2.8 ii Canon. If that would not have been the case, i would have bought this lens! I tested them both on a Sigma test event.
Hi Christopher, I am considering this lens. Many are.comparing this lens to the 150 - 600. I am interested in a comparison with a 70 - 200 2.8 however. The 60 - 600 is posibly better than a 150 - 600. What it does mainly offer however, is the wide end. For the current price, I can buy a 70 - 200 2.8 and a 150 - 600. The tele end has been compared plenty, but how about the wide end? Yes, it will be more lens to carry, but the wide end will be faster and I also photograph many people. The 200 - 600 is interesting for me, but I don't expect to use it that much more then a 70 - 200 plus 2x converter wiuld cover.
I've got to say this: You seem to have made it: Usually, when any non-political channel even dares to put things like "go vote" in a pinned comment, 90% of the comments are along the lines of "how dare you!?" (rather than being about the content of the video), but you explicitly stating your political opinion just gets a tiny amount of comments wanting to give you bonus thumbs up for it - no backlash to be seen... This is really fascinating!
Doing sports photography you need to be able to approach 1000fps under stadium lights. At f6.3 fully zoomed I doubt this could do the job. It's a shame that there's no capable options outside of the super expensive L series in these kind of focal lengths. I presume that increased sensor size will beat lens development to bridge this gap eventually.
Great review Chris. I would have liked to see some more AF examples with R5 as I'm planning on using it with that camera. Do you think the AF is fast enough for BIF?
I didn't have the lens long enough to test BIF but the lens should be absolutely fine for that - as I mentioned in the review it performs great on the R5
How would this perform vs the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary? Aperture is a bit more open, and I can pull back by 90mm. I do find on occasions when I do bird and wildlife with my 150-600 on my R7, 150mmx1.6 crop is too close on some situations. Though I'm not sure if I'd be willing to pay 2x for an extra top of light and 90mm/144mm.
Great review Christopher! What would be on take on Image quality in between this lens and the RF 100-500 mainly to shoot the moon on an R5 and trying to fill in the frame and get sharp images of craters etc. many thanks
@Christopher Frost Photography Thanks again for this review. I have a question: You photograph the same poster every time, and I assume that you move away so far that the whole picture/sensor is exactly filled with the poster. But what does it matter how many megapixels the sensor has? OK, you can maybe zoom in further, but in your videos you always show the same zoom levels, so the megapixels of the sensor should not make a visible difference, at least in the video, or should it? Of course I assume the same sensor size in my statement.
Not really sure what you're asking me, here. When you say that I "always show the same zoom levels", are you saying that I always zoom in to show the test chart to the same extent? Because I don't - you can even see in this review that I zoom in to the 45mp test image a lot closer than the 32.5mp one
@@christopherfrost I guess that answers my question, I never noticed that. So you always zoom until you reach the same amount of pixel, e.g. 1920x1080? Thanks for your answer.
I got this lens a couple months ago, I was unable to get your input on it at the time, but jared polin seems to like it enough for me to just go for it. I am rather pleased with the purchase, but was admittedly a bit worried when I got to your sharpness test....I think something's wrong with me
How would one connect rods to this lens? Doesn't the foot not come off? If attaching to a RED DSMC2 camera how would one properly support the lens? What length rods?
4:43 just as clarification, did you mean to say, "keeping its focalplane**** in place when zooming". Or did you mean to say something else. Sorry if this is a dumb question. I was just a little confused by the way you said that.
Hi Chris. sorry to barge in like this but have you ever done a review of the Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 EX HSM, Canon EF Fit lens .The reason I ask is that I've found a second hand one and for the life of me I can't fine one review of it.
I haven't I'm afraid although I hear it's quite a similar performer to the equivalent Tamron lens from years and years ago, which I tested a while back. It won't be the same but this review will give you a vague idea of what to expect: th-cam.com/video/LvSI6PDXN8U/w-d-xo.html
Hey a lens that I actually own! I love the lens and it’s worth every penny I paid for it. I use it to shoot wildlife all the time and the OS is so good and fast that it feels like you’re turning off physics when it’s engaged. Sometimes it feels like cheating.
hello, On tripod in video mode, does the OS try to "compensate" the fact that it's on tripod ? I've the 150-600 tamron G2 and it's shaky (just a little bit) on tripod
@@Jigamanx2 thanks ! did you notice why there is little shake sometimes, and the rest of the time not ? It's recommended to turn OS OFF on tripod by some companies, but I prefer to let it ON because of the wind
Hi. If I may ask, will this work on my Fujifilm XT100? Sorry to ask, I am not really a professional photographer but I want to be good at it. I am thinking of using it in macro photography. 😊
Honestly, for the 600mm reach and zoom range, it could be a lot worse than 1600 USD. Not saying that's cheap, but the Canon alternatives for that reach are just so far out of the ballpark (and understandably so given the max apertures), it's just nice to have anything at all for under $2K!
@@anjankarki From all I heard, the contemporary and sports version of the 150-600mm have the exact same optics, just different housing (mainly regarding weather sealing).
Apparently the 150-600mm Sports lens does have slightly different optics, although there's huge debate over whether they're any better than the Contemporary version (different review websites say different things)
Thank you for your review, I can't afford the lens right now but maybe I can sit with my fleece jacket my 5d mkIV on my lap and it's cheaper cousin you mentioned the 50-500mm. Off to see if you reviewed the 50-500mm now. Thank you Christopher.
just wonder when the hell sigma an tamron will finally made a 600mm for mirorless it's been years since sony lunched the 200-600 for E mount, and no one else is doing a similar one :/
The 200-600 may well be a Tamron design, and is possibly the Nikon Z 200-600 as well. Of course, we'll see when it launches and we can see the optical construction, but I wouldn't be surprised if Tamron launches it under their brand some time down the line.
@@giklab it may be a tamron design But why would they design it, but never made it and sell it ? Sony is the only brand on the market selling a 600mm for mirorless, that's weird
@@DarkiiDen Tamron is an optics manufacturer. If the two really are the same, there are likely contracts in place preventing them from immediately releasing it for way less money. For example, Tamron 70-300 VC and Nikon AF-S 70-300 VR are the same lens. Same for Tamron/PEntax 18-270mm. That's why I suspect/hope we'll see a Tamron branded 200-600 eventually, but of course we don't know the internals of the upcoming Nikon, so this is just speculation on my part.
@@giklab okay, that make sens But it sucks Because 1.800$ for the sony version is out of range for many people compared to a 8-900$ of the previous 150-600
@@DarkiiDen The Tamron would probably cost much less, at least 20-30% if we go by previous comparisons. That'd put it roughly in the 1200$ range, similar to what 150-600G2 cost at launch, or maybe a bit above that.
How well will this lens work indoors like church Stadium concerts and big huge large events how well will it work for that that they have ability for micro 4/3 attachment will it work on the Blackmagic Design Studio camera 4K does it have the option to operate from the camera inside itself
I have always thought that this is an underrated lens and focal range. I am SO, SO hoping for a Sony E-mount version of this what would be somewhat smaller than the current version, but will utilize all of Sony's fast-focusing capabilities. That focal range is incredible!
In my opinion, it is not very correct to estimate the cost in absolute terms. It is clear that $ 1600 is a lot of money - but telephoto lenses are generaly expensive, so in relative terms, this lens is very, very, veeeeeeeeeery cheap. Just keep in mind that Canon 100-500 4.5-7.1 costs a thousand more, and this is a lens of a different class. This sigma as close as possible to the class of big telephoto monsters. Aperture is (600/6.3 = 95mm) only 5mm smaller than Canon 200-400 f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x (That costs $11 000), or canon 400 4 DO IS II (6900$). While the Canon 100-500 4.5-7.1 is a fairly common mid-size telephoto lens, like 100-400 4.5-5.6 or 300 4, without any extraordinary claims. So if this lens is "expensive", then Renault Sandero is also an "expensive" car.
Having a high megapixel sensor doesn't affect how sharp a lens is and they are not "more challenging" or brutal. Better sensors give better images. Its just that you can zoom in closer when viewing images than with a sensor with less megapixels. Because you're now looking at the image closer, you see blur, just like you do whenever there is an increase in enlargement. But you don't go backwards, at an equivalent magnification a high megapixel sensor will show at least the same image quality, or better if that lense has the resolving power to do so. It amazes me how many people don't understand what they are looking at when they zoom in on their monitor. This is the biggest fallacy in photography, people implying that you can get worse image quality with a lense when you put a higher res sensor behind it. Its not the case.
Sometimes I have zero interest in a lens (like this one) but I just watch your video anyway because your videos are always so soothing to watch haha
Same , I’d never in my life consider this lens but I’ll watch .
@@vincentrivera @Ddreadster some Bob Ross vibes going on here 👨🎨
The Bob Ross effect :-)
Those super zooms are shit like some Nikon 18-200 24-300, this thing is something else
I have one of these. It is the perfect airshow lens. You still need a wide angle for the static shots (I use a Z 7 now with the 14-30) but the D500 with this lens gets all the action. All we need now is a bloody airshow!
This exactly why I clicked this video, to see if it will work for my airshow photography. Very happy to have found your comment!
One of the best lens reviewer in TH-cam. I bought sigma 150-600mm lens after watching your video.... thanks Chris... love from India🥰🥰😍😍
well done. The review is about the 60 - 600mm not the 150-600mm ....
@@the_iceman_9397 so what?. I bought lens after watching his older 150-600 mm video. No this.
This lense was my biggest investment so far and I haven't had any regrets since.
Its performance on a Nikon D7500 is iust amazing.
I am able to shoot Jupiter, Saturn and Venus hand-held so that the planets are visible as disks.
On wildlife, the results are tad sharp if you know how to handle the lense; starting with 150 mm you will get a very smooth bokeh.
Yes, it is 2.7 kg, but I am rather a big guy.
Highly recommended as well!
It's Parfocal and perfect for video, so who accidentally released this alien technology to the masses?
Really? Because that makes a huge difference, the 100-400 from Sony is a nightmare for video if you zoom in and out a lot!
While parfocal is good, the zoom ring is tight and impossible to have a smooth zoom. So, video will be tough.
Great review! Thank you for taking the time. I'm thinking of getting this for the R5 actually, so the end made me laugh a little. Haha, I'm not rich either but did splurg on the R5 recently.
Thank you again for a fantastic review. I'll add it to my wishful thinking list!! Your outro was also fantastic!!
When you consider the zoom range it almost seems like a bargain against buying 2 or more to get the same range.
I bought this lens last year and couldnt agree more with this review. Its just so good at wildlife/nature photography, the only issue is safely carrying it during travel
What about the Autofocus?
Chris can you do a comparison video between this and the new version please?
I wonder how often a lens like this actually gets used at 60mm.
Early sports photographers could probably get some use out of it at 60mm. Ideally you'd have a 70-200 f/2.8 for something that's close enough to need something that wide, but if you have to decide between the wider aperture and the range, I feel like a lot of people would rather the range until they can afford a second body and more lenses.
Christopher actually touch on the subject in the video. Good for a wide view to scout the landscape before zooming in to your desired focal length.
@@domtomazo @Azenturi Why didn't I think of that...
I did use it to get nice landscape pics. It is an excellent lense.
Used for Sport photography this lens will be very often used at 60-200mm range, just as much as at 200-600mm range, because in many Sports point of interest is moving rapidly toward you and from you.
It seems you believe this lens in Wild life lens exclusively, which is clearly not the case.
You can do a PUSH PULL to zoom in fast and zoom out. I own this great lens and using it on MC11 SA-E + A7iii. Love it!
Love your reviews Chris... Very scientific. I have only referred to your reviews to make lens choices...
This came out just after I purchased the 150-600mm sport. Out of the box I was sorely disappointed after spending so much hard earned cash. After spending an afternoon adjusting the focus via in camera micro focus adjustment on my Canon 80D and Canon 5DMk3 I was amazed at the sharpness of that lens and use it frequently, even more than the Canon 100-400mm Mk2.
Great review, just like all the other reviews on your channel! Bravo!
Great lens review as always, Christopher!
* while I pet my eos R6 with a 28-70 f2 lying on my lap *
The ending was hilarious!
This lens def deserves a mirrorless makeover. It looks pretty awesome!
Long telephoto lenses don't need short flange focal distance. I have the 800mm f/11 and its rear element is very far from the sensor.
Would you recommend this or the canon 100-400 gen II? Portrait, sports, and other uses
It's since been its fifth been a full year review of the sigma 60 to 600 mm lens ! This is been a great review , and I have taken the time to read all of the comments made about the Sigma 60 to 600 mm ! Mister Frost you mention that this lens will work well on a
aps-c camera ! But is it possible for you to make a review using a aps-c camera adapter to this lens ? I am considering purchasing this lens and trying to adopt it to my aps-c camera ! Thank you !
my next lens will be the sig 150-600mm c, having seen this the extra at wide end would be nice but for the weight and price i think i stick to getting the 150-600c, great review as always
Funnily enough, my particular 150-600C was actually sharper than the 150-600S, Tamron, 150-600, Nikon 200-500, and Sigma 60-600 I compared. I'm not sure if I just encountered particularly bad examples of the other lenses, or a godly C version.
@@giklab Yes, I have seen much worse performance from this 60-600mm. So there seems to be quite a lot of variation in quality. I hope this particular lens is not cherry-picked by Sigma... But even if it is, that's not Christopher's fault.
@@tkermi No doubt this lens was triple checked and calibrated to a degree of no error before it was given to christopher to review
@@stevess7777 Yes, that's most likely the case. Overall I really like Sigma lenses though. Especially the newer models give really high price-performance.
@@tkermi I do agree. I like sigma zooms as they're much cheaper than natives options.
Do you consider reviewing the Tamron 28-200 lens? It's also quite an interesting lens.
I'm finding the same results as you, i was shooting it on my 90D (at 33mp) and always finding the sharpness quite lacking at 600mm. but a while back i bought a 6D mark II and found that the sharpness is quite better on the 26mp of this camera.
It's funny that everybody is talking about the 150-600 and forgeting about this lens .... i guess it's the price ?
at the time that i bought it, it was only 300 euros more than the 150-600 sport ....
We own an R that is 30mp and a 6d mark II also. I was glad to read your comments on the sharpness. I think we'll be getting this lens. Thanks...
Where this lens really shines is that it's one the few camera lenses that is "Parfocal" meaning it retains perfect focus at all zooms levels. A necessity for shooting high-end video. The Sigma 150-600mm sport is NOT PARFOCAL so if you shoot video this is not the sense for you. All Cine Lenses are par focal but Cinema lenses are quite expensive for this reason. Understand that more than 90% of the photography lenses by Canon, Nikon and yes Sony are not parfocal because the cost to make it that way. Some lens come close to being parfocal but be careful because if you are not paying attention you can get burnered by that almost perfect focus. For critical work keep it parfocal. Also even if you are not much of a videographer having the focus still perfect even though you have zoomed in and out is a boon for nature photographers.
Early in 2019 i doubted to get this lens or the 150-600 C. Went for the 150-600, since i already have a 70-200 2.8 ii Canon. If that would not have been the case, i would have bought this lens! I tested them both on a Sigma test event.
i have the sony 200-600 but I am thinking of returning it and getting this one with an mc-11. decisions decisions.
Hey Chris, from your experience: what lens is better 60-600 Sport? or 150-600mm Sport?
Thank you in advance!
make a comparison video of sigma 50-500 and 60-600mm lens and also with 150-60mm, contemprary and sports version
Thanks Chris, another excellent review.
Hey Chris, how was the autofocus when the lens was used in canon r5?
Hi Christopher, I am considering this lens. Many are.comparing this lens to the 150 - 600. I am interested in a comparison with a 70 - 200 2.8 however. The 60 - 600 is posibly better than a 150 - 600. What it does mainly offer however, is the wide end. For the current price, I can buy a 70 - 200 2.8 and a 150 - 600. The tele end has been compared plenty, but how about the wide end?
Yes, it will be more lens to carry, but the wide end will be faster and I also photograph many people. The 200 - 600 is interesting for me, but I don't expect to use it that much more then a 70 - 200 plus 2x converter wiuld cover.
I've got to say this: You seem to have made it:
Usually, when any non-political channel even dares to put things like "go vote" in a pinned comment, 90% of the comments are along the lines of "how dare you!?" (rather than being about the content of the video), but you explicitly stating your political opinion just gets a tiny amount of comments wanting to give you bonus thumbs up for it - no backlash to be seen...
This is really fascinating!
You should have seen the comments section on the video where someone spotted a glimpse of a Ben Shapiro book in some footage of my bookshelf!
@@christopherfrost lol
This lens sharpness, IS and price alone deserve a highly recommended.
Thanks man, I have the 60-600mm, so far you did the best test.
Doing sports photography you need to be able to approach 1000fps under stadium lights. At f6.3 fully zoomed I doubt this could do the job. It's a shame that there's no capable options outside of the super expensive L series in these kind of focal lengths. I presume that increased sensor size will beat lens development to bridge this gap eventually.
Thanks for reviewing this lens Christopher
could you show us how you test lenses? I wanna see how you test lenses that are like, 500mm. just a general BTS of it all
Thanks for the insightful review, well done!
Great review Chris. I would have liked to see some more AF examples with R5 as I'm planning on using it with that camera. Do you think the AF is fast enough for BIF?
I didn't have the lens long enough to test BIF but the lens should be absolutely fine for that - as I mentioned in the review it performs great on the R5
Hi Christopher, is the sharpness better than the one with the Contenporary? Thank you. Have a nice day
How would this perform vs the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary? Aperture is a bit more open, and I can pull back by 90mm. I do find on occasions when I do bird and wildlife with my 150-600 on my R7, 150mmx1.6 crop is too close on some situations. Though I'm not sure if I'd be willing to pay 2x for an extra top of light and 90mm/144mm.
'
is this len come with a macro closer and clear as NO blur focus
I have this for my Nikon D850 and its amazing.
Great review Christopher! What would be on take on Image quality in between this lens and the RF 100-500 mainly to shoot the moon on an R5 and trying to fill in the frame and get sharp images of craters etc. many thanks
Hi, what was the distance to the test chart at the beginning of the video?
Thank you very much!
@Christopher Frost Photography
Thanks again for this review.
I have a question:
You photograph the same poster every time, and I assume that you move away so far that the whole picture/sensor is exactly filled with the poster. But what does it matter how many megapixels the sensor has? OK, you can maybe zoom in further, but in your videos you always show the same zoom levels, so the megapixels of the sensor should not make a visible difference, at least in the video, or should it? Of course I assume the same sensor size in my statement.
Not really sure what you're asking me, here. When you say that I "always show the same zoom levels", are you saying that I always zoom in to show the test chart to the same extent? Because I don't - you can even see in this review that I zoom in to the 45mp test image a lot closer than the 32.5mp one
@@christopherfrost I guess that answers my question, I never noticed that.
So you always zoom until you reach the same amount of pixel, e.g. 1920x1080?
Thanks for your answer.
I hope to see a review of the RF100-500 soon 👍
Hi Chris, I am an aviation photographer. I currently use a Nikon D5600 and a 70-300mm lens. What would you recommend for me to upgrade too.
I got this lens a couple months ago, I was unable to get your input on it at the time, but jared polin seems to like it enough for me to just go for it. I am rather pleased with the purchase, but was admittedly a bit worried when I got to your sharpness test....I think something's wrong with me
Thanks for reviewing this lens
How would one connect rods to this lens? Doesn't the foot not come off? If attaching to a RED DSMC2 camera how would one properly support the lens? What length rods?
Using the Ef to Rf adapter, were you able to use high speed frame rate?
What's it like taking astrol shots?
4:43 just as clarification, did you mean to say, "keeping its focalplane**** in place when zooming". Or did you mean to say something else. Sorry if this is a dumb question. I was just a little confused by the way you said that.
Yea it will be this. It can keep your subject in focus when you zoom in.
Hi Chris. sorry to barge in like this but have you ever done a review of the Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 EX HSM, Canon EF Fit lens .The reason I ask is that I've found a second hand one and for the life of me I can't fine one review of it.
I haven't I'm afraid although I hear it's quite a similar performer to the equivalent Tamron lens from years and years ago, which I tested a while back. It won't be the same but this review will give you a vague idea of what to expect: th-cam.com/video/LvSI6PDXN8U/w-d-xo.html
@@christopherfrost Thanxs .
Could you please get your hands on the Sony 200-600G? I love your reviews!
Did you tested with the animal eye AF ?? Does it work ?
Hey a lens that I actually own! I love the lens and it’s worth every penny I paid for it. I use it to shoot wildlife all the time and the OS is so good and fast that it feels like you’re turning off physics when it’s engaged. Sometimes it feels like cheating.
hello,
On tripod in video mode, does the OS try to "compensate" the fact that it's on tripod ? I've the 150-600 tamron G2 and it's shaky (just a little bit) on tripod
@@PaulBienvenu1 sometimes it has very minimal shake while on a tripod. When using it stationary I usually turn the OS off.
@@Jigamanx2 thanks ! did you notice why there is little shake sometimes, and the rest of the time not ?
It's recommended to turn OS OFF on tripod by some companies, but I prefer to let it ON because of the wind
@Christopher Frost, why is it that you should only zoom in at 200mm for "macro"?
That’s probably the focal length that has the highest magnification
What Thomas Lopata said. That's just how some zoom lenses work
Hi. If I may ask, will this work on my Fujifilm XT100? Sorry to ask, I am not really a professional photographer but I want to be good at it. I am thinking of using it in macro photography. 😊
Honestly, for the 600mm reach and zoom range, it could be a lot worse than 1600 USD. Not saying that's cheap, but the Canon alternatives for that reach are just so far out of the ballpark (and understandably so given the max apertures), it's just nice to have anything at all for under $2K!
I'm currently looking at the Sigma FE 60-600 vs the Canon RF 100-500 for the R6. Any thoughts?
Wait did this lens came out last year or few years ago?
How does 60-600 compairs with sigma 150-600mm sports?? 🤔
he has a review of the 150-600 ... just watch it lol
@@JetBen555 i don't think so.. He haven't reviewed the sport version of the lens...
@@anjankarki From all I heard, the contemporary and sports version of the 150-600mm have the exact same optics, just different housing (mainly regarding weather sealing).
@@Shadow81989 they cant have "exact same optics" as all dimensions are substantially different. Performancewise they are pretty close, ofcourse.
Apparently the 150-600mm Sports lens does have slightly different optics, although there's huge debate over whether they're any better than the Contemporary version (different review websites say different things)
Wow what a beast, thank you for the video.
Thanks again Chris!
hey how do you test these tele lenses? do you have a huge hallway for testing on?
I take them outside, on a day when the weather conditions are just right.
Thank you for your review, I can't afford the lens right now but maybe I can sit with my fleece jacket my 5d mkIV on my lap and it's cheaper cousin you mentioned the 50-500mm. Off to see if you reviewed the 50-500mm now. Thank you Christopher.
How is the perfomance with adapter on EOS R/5/6/RPS?
just wonder when the hell sigma an tamron will finally made a 600mm for mirorless
it's been years since sony lunched the 200-600 for E mount, and no one else is doing a similar one :/
The 200-600 may well be a Tamron design, and is possibly the Nikon Z 200-600 as well. Of course, we'll see when it launches and we can see the optical construction, but I wouldn't be surprised if Tamron launches it under their brand some time down the line.
@@giklab it may be a tamron design
But why would they design it, but never made it and sell it ?
Sony is the only brand on the market selling a 600mm for mirorless, that's weird
@@DarkiiDen Tamron is an optics manufacturer. If the two really are the same, there are likely contracts in place preventing them from immediately releasing it for way less money.
For example, Tamron 70-300 VC and Nikon AF-S 70-300 VR are the same lens. Same for Tamron/PEntax 18-270mm. That's why I suspect/hope we'll see a Tamron branded 200-600 eventually, but of course we don't know the internals of the upcoming Nikon, so this is just speculation on my part.
@@giklab okay, that make sens
But it sucks
Because 1.800$ for the sony version is out of range for many people compared to a 8-900$ of the previous 150-600
@@DarkiiDen The Tamron would probably cost much less, at least 20-30% if we go by previous comparisons. That'd put it roughly in the 1200$ range, similar to what 150-600G2 cost at launch, or maybe a bit above that.
What about the Autofocus?
I do have the Canon R6. Who is using this lens on an R6, and what do you think of this combo?
what happen to the canon 6d ? no every body can afford R body.....or 40 something MP...
Was that a shot of broad stairs beach
Yes
@@christopherfrost my neck of the woods
How much
Christopher sigma 500mm f4 sport review please.
Cool review but would be awesome to add a sensor that's not challenging like 24 megapixels
Im happy with my 150-600mm sigma lens :)
How well does this one work with the mc11 on a Sony body
I wish you said which mounts the lenses you review are available on
I normally do, so I will try to do that again in the future
Can you help me? It fits in a nikon d7100??
Do a lot of the sigma lenses have corrections with Canon cameras?
It seems to depend on the camera. My Canon 6D never corrected them, but my EOS R5 seems to correct them quite happily
Will this fit a Canon rebel t5
How well will this lens work indoors like church Stadium concerts and big huge large events how well will it work for that that they have ability for micro 4/3 attachment will it work on the Blackmagic Design Studio camera 4K does it have the option to operate from the camera inside itself
Basically, if f/8 gives you enough light for what you are doing, this lens will perform very well for you.
Please make a comparison video 60-600 vs 150-600(s)
As I said in the video, the 60-600 is very slightly sharper
Which one is better the Sigma 60-600mm f/4.5-6.3 Sports or the 150-600mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports in terms of sharpness and auto focus? :)
I haven't tested the 150-600 Sports, only the Contemporary version, which was slightly softer than this 60-600mm lens
@@christopherfrost I hope you will get this lens to test it as well. Thanks for the answer.
How far away have you to go to be able to test at 600mm or even on a Crop Sensor?
Far!
I might just get this lens for my wife for Christmas. It's on sale here in South Africa!
I have always thought that this is an underrated lens and focal range. I am SO, SO hoping for a Sony E-mount version of this what would be somewhat smaller than the current version, but will utilize all of Sony's fast-focusing capabilities. That focal range is incredible!
I can not find a comparison of this lens with Canon r 100-500. Only because the canon lens price is near twice the sigma price.
Why no one choses Nikon mount adapted to Sony?
Great review...
"The Beast from the East!"
Very nice review, I said to myself from my drawing room as I drank cognac in my evening jacket.
So you can set it to f8, and have better results than Canon f11 prime while still having 10x zoom? Nice.
Yes, but it will cost a lot more money, and will be much, much bigger and heavier
Yes - I hired these 2 last weekend. The F11 stayed in the hire box since the saturday noon time!
Great ending :)
In my opinion, it is not very correct to estimate the cost in absolute terms. It is clear that $ 1600 is a lot of money - but telephoto lenses are generaly expensive, so in relative terms, this lens is very, very, veeeeeeeeeery cheap. Just keep in mind that Canon 100-500 4.5-7.1 costs a thousand more, and this is a lens of a different class. This sigma as close as possible to the class of big telephoto monsters. Aperture is (600/6.3 = 95mm) only 5mm smaller than Canon 200-400 f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x (That costs $11 000), or canon 400 4 DO IS II (6900$). While the Canon 100-500 4.5-7.1 is a fairly common mid-size telephoto lens, like 100-400 4.5-5.6 or 300 4, without any extraordinary claims. So if this lens is "expensive", then Renault Sandero is also an "expensive" car.
I don't agree about the Sandero 😁
Thanks man for the info, event not using this lens.
"Parfocal...keeping it's focal length in place as you zoom in and out". Did you mean "sayting in focus as you zoom in and out"?
'Keeping the same focus point', I should have said
Having a high megapixel sensor doesn't affect how sharp a lens is and they are not "more challenging" or brutal. Better sensors give better images. Its just that you can zoom in closer when viewing images than with a sensor with less megapixels. Because you're now looking at the image closer, you see blur, just like you do whenever there is an increase in enlargement. But you don't go backwards, at an equivalent magnification a high megapixel sensor will show at least the same image quality, or better if that lense has the resolving power to do so. It amazes me how many people don't understand what they are looking at when they zoom in on their monitor. This is the biggest fallacy in photography, people implying that you can get worse image quality with a lense when you put a higher res sensor behind it. Its not the case.
True
@@amitkrupal1234 Thanks Amit.
Lmao at that closing comment