You must be an educator! Terrific review of a lens I’m receiving late this afternoon- very clear and objective. Look forward to watching more of your vids- and am intrigued by Squarespace- I thought is was a credit card thing….
Hi Toby, thanks for review. I bought the Sigma 100-400 DN for my A7R3 when it first came out - it is sharp but the focus was worse than on the previous Canon mount version I was running via MC11 - the new version focus would be in focus for first shot only in a burst and did the same on my A6400 also. Another copy in a shop did the same on an A7R4. This has, at last, after almost 1 year been fixed after the firmware update to V02 which required sending back to Sigma for a factory "firmware" update - shows how far out the initial release was and has meant I have been without the lens while sent back from NZ to Sigma Australia twice for a period of about 2 months out of 12. At least it's fixed now - but any viewers should ensure they get the V02 update ASAP. I do still like the lens, particularly its portability for landscape work. I am thinking of the 150-600 Sigma for birds though now - it looks a good allrounder.
I just bought the 150-600 with 1.4TC for my S1R. The results are great, also the TC is working with sharp results. It is the best TC I could use over the last 30 years. I used the lens handhold for one day now and I will use at least a monopod in the future!
Just bought the 150-600. I chose that over the Sony 200-600 because of the portability (the Sigma fits in my camera bag) and the price. I have gotten some gob-smacking shots with this lens and I'm just beginning to learn how to use it.
I bought the Sony 100-400 for my a7iii. The image quality was excellent, but I found the zoom creep to be very irritating whenever I walked around with it. I sold it and bought the Sony 200-600 when that came out and I’m happy I did. In the 200-400mm range, the 100-400 is a touch sharper, but as I use these mainly to shoot birds and often very small birds such as finches, I find the extra range of the 200-600 gives me much better image quality compared to shooting at 400mm and cropping. I also own the 1.4x teleconverter and I haven’t had great results on either lens. I’m not sure if it’s user error or I have a bad copy, but I struggle to get sharp images with the tc attached, regardless of my shutter speed or whether I’m on a tripod or not.
Hi Tim, Zoom creep is annoying and seems to be present in almost all lenses that are not internal zoom. I do agree the 200-600 out a 600 is excellent. You should be able to get some sharp results with the 1.4x tele. I have with both 100-400 and 200-600. Some more investigation there is important.
Did you read my mind Toby, was just looking for a zoom lens for my A7M3. The Sigma looks very good, and much more affordable for the amateur photographer then the Sony 100-400mm. The native Sony lens does have some up points towards the Sigma but the money I save for a good Sigma lens with some more reach I can spend on something else. Thanks again fr the review.
I bought the Sigma 150-600 that you reviewed. I found that I needed to turn off the inlens image stabilisation when using on a tripod. The other issue is I can’t buy a lens dock for Sony to set up custom buttons and update any firmware. Apart from that Iam delighted with my decision. Iam using it on a Sony a6600
I recently picked up Sigma 100-400 due to it's compact size. I plan to pair it with Sony 24-105 f4 so with two lenses I can cover 24-400 in relatively compact size. For strictly wildlife photography, I'm struggling between the Sony 200-600 and Sigma 150-600. Sigma is shorter stowed so it is easier to carry but Sony's internal zoom that goes from 200-600 with half twist makes it a lot easier to track while zooming.
It is a tough call between the two lenses. I really like the value of this Sigma and Ithink the push pull zoom makes it easy to zoom and track but down the road - being able to add a tele to the 200-600 is interesting.
Nice, I also shoot landscapes mainly but we have a kingfisher in the local park. With my previous setup, 400mm just isn't enough. My current camera has more megapixels and now it is a close call between the Tamron 50-400 and this Sigma which almost have the same price in Germany (not in my country Netherlands where the Tamron is 200 euro more expensive)
Hello handsome, the reason why Sigma lenses allow you to use first party compatible options is because they reverse engineer sony cameras and crack the code, hence why you can achieve 120fps!!! using AF-A, use fully physical stabilization and highlight the PDAF area. About the active stabilization in video my DG DN 70-200 OS does make the camera gimbal sing.10:20 you can also see the sigma is actually sharper. Either that or mistakenly placed the labels, for the left one being slightly yellowish.
I have Sigma 100-400 but you are correct that I might need that extra reach of 600mm, so the decision time for 150-600 (sigma) or 200-600 (sony), I think I will go with Sony, it is a native Sony and price difference in my country is about $450. I will wait until the coming sale season.
So I use both the 200-600 and 100-400 and am realizing I may have a unique use... I need a lens that will stabilize for video while on a tripod (wind shakes n such). So far the only lens I've used that continues to stabilize when filming off a tripod is the sigma 60-600. Both Sony lenses will stop stabilizing when on the tripod after about 3 seconds, and this is a big issue when filming wildlife in windy conditions. My biggest question is if you know of a way to get the Sony 200-600 to continue stabilizing on video when on a tripod. My next question is, will this 150-600 stabilize like I need it to on a tripod, or will I run into the same issue? Thanks a lot, and thank you for the solid review.
Interesting question. I don't have an answer but reach out to Ryan M - th-cam.com/users/RyanMenseWildlife he does a ton of wildlife filming with Sony lenses and he might have an answer.
Question, I read that lenses that have their own in lens stabilisation cause Sony cameras to switch off gyro data, so catalyst browse is not possible. Is this true?
I have the Canon version. On my Canon R6 the focus is a bit slow and the pics are not tack sharp at f6.3, even at very short shutter speeds. I guess Canon doesn't want the Sigma to be very compatible with the new R-series.
I have the Sigma 100-400 on my Sony A1. It is the perfect lens for kids baseball and soccer fields. The 100mm is super nice to have on the wide end if you get to be close and it’s so light it feels just like a 70-200 2.8. But once they get in the outfield of bigger fields you start to wish for more reach. I’m stuck between the Sigma and Sony 200-600 as well. I think I’ll go sigma for the size and wide flexibility even though it does drive me crazy they lock you out of your full frame rate. Just too many tradeoffs for the extra FPS.
Hey Greg - It is a little annoying but I did just interview an olympic photographer and she said 10 fps is more than enough - I think that is good persepctive for all of us sometimes. Heads up the Sigma is on sale today, so if you haven't picked it up yet - now would be a good time. bhpho.to/3kAbxFs
Hi.... superb & indepth review..I have been hearing some users facing some focusing issues with Sigma...since I am planning to buy one of these Zoom lens for mainly Landscape photography with some Bird & Wildlife photography which would be your final recommendation...currently there is a discount scheme on Sigma 150-600 so its infact slightly cheaper than Tamron 150-500 but that doesn't matter since i consider lens as long-term investment. I use a Sony A7RIII currently with Sony 24-105 G & Sigma14-24mm... looking at the build quality & performance of Sigma 14-24mm i was actually tilting towards Sigma but I am little confused now frankly between Sigma 150-600 DG DN OS SPORT & Tamron 150-500 Di III VXD...Thanks in advance!!
Already have the 200-600mm G lens, but might pick the Tamron as it's very compact and I think the best macro-lite lens among the three? I was surprised with how good Sigma is as well. In our monsoon season I won't even attempt to take any of them with constant drizzles/light rain. Have the Sigma 24-70mm art lens on the back and I think I'm good to go. Considering another telephoto lens because I might buy the a7 IV along with my current a7S III and use both to shoot video with creative composition/transition between the two in the edit to start my wildlife filmmaking, hopefully.
I may have missed it, but I don't really see the value of the Sigma 150-600 over the Sony 200-600.. 50mm wider sure, but I prefer the internal zoom of the 200-600 and I believe the sizes are more or less comparable ?
@@astrodysseus I agree - with current discount on Sony it is pretty close. Sigma was $300 off the other day - that was a pretty significant savings but its gone now.
in some countries the price difference is almost $700-800 Australia, for example, the recommended retail price of the sigma is $1987 where the sony is close to $2699, sony is ridiculously overpriced here in aussie land
Thanks for this good review. I had the Sony 100-400mm and as you said, 400mm is not always enough for wildlife photography. Now trying to decide between the 200-600mm or this Sigma. Don't think I would need the 1.4x converter so the Sigma seems to be the best option today. By any chance do you have a link to download the pictures ?
Now I’m in a pickle. Debating whether or not I should sell my 100-400 GM to buy this (and maybe put a little extra $$$ in my pocket to boot.) I’m shooting the RIV so the shutter rate being kneecapped isn’t dealbreaker for me. I love the 100-400 but you’re right I always feel like I could use some more reach. I do a lot of landscape at the wider end so the loss of 50mm sucks, but I also have the 135GM to carry the slack on that end, which is sharper than any of the lenses on this list anyway. So yeah, tough call. I have shot with the 200-600, took it to the PNW last year to photograph Roosevelt elk and that lens just did not agree with me. It was heavy, I didn’t like it, and I just don’t think the results were as good as if I just took my 100-400 instead and shot in crop mode. So that one’s not an option. I sent that lens back, I just was not happy with the results.
Sorry I am a little late in replying here - it's a tough call. A 3rd option is add the 1.4x extender. If you shoot landscapes often I am not sure I would want to give up that 100.. I personally don't want to give it up. I gave the 200-600 another try on my recent arctic workshop and I really grew to love it - yes its heavy but quality was there for me - it's the lens I will likely add for future wildlife based workshops.
Excellent video and review! I'm happy with my purchase after shooting with it over the weekend. I'm confused about programming the custom buttons. Any links or hints?
Hi Daniel! Nice - so glad you are happy with the lens. You need to go into the button customization screen (yellow menu/toolbox) and it is on the last page of buttons. I show how I use it here th-cam.com/video/FsmZVopNqxA/w-d-xo.html
What body were you using for the testing? I find that the focusing speed and precision is as much a function of the body as it is of the lens, especially with Sony bodies. I have the a7r3 and I know that the A1 is a different league.
either the 100 - 400 or the tamron 100-500 if cheaper then the sigma would be a good by for the a6000, size proportions the 6000 will feel weird the heavier the lens
I bought the Sony A7 iv and the Sony 200-600mm lens and went out shooting my favorite wildlife subjects, warblers, kinglets and the like. Previously, I'd been using the Sony A99ii with the 70-400mm zoom and I was getting good results. The 200-600mm was fantastic at 600mm unless your subject was less than 12 yards away. Well, if you are shooting small creatures - birds, butterflies, flowers then the 200-600mm is a frustrating horror story. The nice little warbler poses on a branch 10 ft away and the lens can't find focus. I can't ask the warbler to fly further away and I can't walk back further without falling off a bank, and the bird isn't going to hang around. So, I sold it and got the Sigma. At 150mm, it is almost a macro. At 600mm the minimum focus distance is down to 7 feet. Ultimately, the Sony may be a tad sharper, but it was a poor lens for shooting small wild life. I'm really enjoying the Sigma.
You must be an educator! Terrific review of a lens I’m receiving late this afternoon- very clear and objective. Look forward to watching more of your vids- and am intrigued by Squarespace- I thought is was a credit card thing….
Love the Tamron lens, so small it fits in my bag mounted on the camera perfectly and never leaves one of my camera bodies
Hi Toby, thanks for review. I bought the Sigma 100-400 DN for my A7R3 when it first came out - it is sharp but the focus was worse than on the previous Canon mount version I was running via MC11 - the new version focus would be in focus for first shot only in a burst and did the same on my A6400 also. Another copy in a shop did the same on an A7R4. This has, at last, after almost 1 year been fixed after the firmware update to V02 which required sending back to Sigma for a factory "firmware" update - shows how far out the initial release was and has meant I have been without the lens while sent back from NZ to Sigma Australia twice for a period of about 2 months out of 12. At least it's fixed now - but any viewers should ensure they get the V02 update ASAP. I do still like the lens, particularly its portability for landscape work. I am thinking of the 150-600 Sigma for birds though now - it looks a good allrounder.
Thanks Mark - Appreciate that info. Sorry it was such an ordeal to get it sorted!
I just bought the 150-600 with 1.4TC for my S1R. The results are great, also the TC is working with sharp results. It is the best TC I could use over the last 30 years. I used the lens handhold for one day now and I will use at least a monopod in the future!
Nice -you are lucky with the L mount offering teleconverters. The Sony photographers are left out :(
Just bought the 150-600. I chose that over the Sony 200-600 because of the portability (the Sigma fits in my camera bag) and the price. I have gotten some gob-smacking shots with this lens and I'm just beginning to learn how to use it.
I bought the Sony 100-400 for my a7iii. The image quality was excellent, but I found the zoom creep to be very irritating whenever I walked around with it. I sold it and bought the Sony 200-600 when that came out and I’m happy I did. In the 200-400mm range, the 100-400 is a touch sharper, but as I use these mainly to shoot birds and often very small birds such as finches, I find the extra range of the 200-600 gives me much better image quality compared to shooting at 400mm and cropping. I also own the 1.4x teleconverter and I haven’t had great results on either lens. I’m not sure if it’s user error or I have a bad copy, but I struggle to get sharp images with the tc attached, regardless of my shutter speed or whether I’m on a tripod or not.
Hi Tim, Zoom creep is annoying and seems to be present in almost all lenses that are not internal zoom. I do agree the 200-600 out a 600 is excellent. You should be able to get some sharp results with the 1.4x tele. I have with both 100-400 and 200-600. Some more investigation there is important.
Did you read my mind Toby, was just looking for a zoom lens for my A7M3. The Sigma looks very good, and much more affordable for the amateur photographer then the Sony 100-400mm. The native Sony lens does have some up points towards the Sigma but the money I save for a good Sigma lens with some more reach I can spend on something else. Thanks again fr the review.
Really glad you found it helpful! Thanks!
Great review! I just ordered the Sigma 150-600 to use with my A7 IV for wildlife and landscape photography.
I have the same camera and lens, how do you like it, I find difficult to keep focus of fast moving animals
Same setup. Im struggling with a decent hit rate of sharp images with moving wildlife
@@artcien mind focus areas. For fast animals use Zone and eye lock tracking to ensure the face is in focus.
thanks for a great and honest review!!!
I bought the Sigma 150-600 that you reviewed. I found that I needed to turn off the inlens image stabilisation when using on a tripod. The other issue is I can’t buy a lens dock for Sony to set up custom buttons and update any firmware. Apart from that Iam delighted with my decision. Iam using it on a Sony a6600
I recently picked up Sigma 100-400 due to it's compact size. I plan to pair it with Sony 24-105 f4 so with two lenses I can cover 24-400 in relatively compact size. For strictly wildlife photography, I'm struggling between the Sony 200-600 and Sigma 150-600. Sigma is shorter stowed so it is easier to carry but Sony's internal zoom that goes from 200-600 with half twist makes it a lot easier to track while zooming.
It is a tough call between the two lenses. I really like the value of this Sigma and Ithink the push pull zoom makes it easy to zoom and track but down the road - being able to add a tele to the 200-600 is interesting.
@@photorectoby Oh yes, TC compatibility is another advantage for sure.
Nice, I also shoot landscapes mainly but we have a kingfisher in the local park. With my previous setup, 400mm just isn't enough. My current camera has more megapixels and now it is a close call between the Tamron 50-400 and this Sigma which almost have the same price in Germany (not in my country Netherlands where the Tamron is 200 euro more expensive)
Hello handsome, the reason why Sigma lenses allow you to use first party compatible options is because they reverse engineer sony cameras and crack the code, hence why you can achieve 120fps!!! using AF-A, use fully physical stabilization and highlight the PDAF area. About the active stabilization in video my DG DN 70-200 OS does make the camera gimbal sing.10:20 you can also see the sigma is actually sharper. Either that or mistakenly placed the labels, for the left one being slightly yellowish.
I have Sigma 100-400 but you are correct that I might need that extra reach of 600mm, so the decision time for 150-600 (sigma) or 200-600 (sony), I think I will go with Sony, it is a native Sony and price difference in my country is about $450. I will wait until the coming sale season.
I have ordered the Sigma 150-600 dg dn for my S5.
Nice - and you have teleconverters availavle to you as well.
So I use both the 200-600 and 100-400 and am realizing I may have a unique use... I need a lens that will stabilize for video while on a tripod (wind shakes n such). So far the only lens I've used that continues to stabilize when filming off a tripod is the sigma 60-600. Both Sony lenses will stop stabilizing when on the tripod after about 3 seconds, and this is a big issue when filming wildlife in windy conditions. My biggest question is if you know of a way to get the Sony 200-600 to continue stabilizing on video when on a tripod. My next question is, will this 150-600 stabilize like I need it to on a tripod, or will I run into the same issue?
Thanks a lot, and thank you for the solid review.
Interesting question. I don't have an answer but reach out to Ryan M - th-cam.com/users/RyanMenseWildlife he does a ton of wildlife filming with Sony lenses and he might have an answer.
Nice review, thanks! So you can't use the ibis of the camera, the Active Steady Shot and the OS on the lens all the same time?
The lens takes over as far as I know and it is on or off.
great video! would have liked to have seen it reviewed against the Sony 200-600...
Question, I read that lenses that have their own in lens stabilisation cause Sony cameras to switch off gyro data, so catalyst browse is not possible. Is this true?
I have the Canon version. On my Canon R6 the focus is a bit slow and the pics are not tack sharp at f6.3, even at very short shutter speeds. I guess Canon doesn't want the Sigma to be very compatible with the new R-series.
I have the Sigma 100-400 on my Sony A1. It is the perfect lens for kids baseball and soccer fields. The 100mm is super nice to have on the wide end if you get to be close and it’s so light it feels just like a 70-200 2.8. But once they get in the outfield of bigger fields you start to wish for more reach. I’m stuck between the Sigma and Sony 200-600 as well. I think I’ll go sigma for the size and wide flexibility even though it does drive me crazy they lock you out of your full frame rate. Just too many tradeoffs for the extra FPS.
Hey Greg - It is a little annoying but I did just interview an olympic photographer and she said 10 fps is more than enough - I think that is good persepctive for all of us sometimes. Heads up the Sigma is on sale today, so if you haven't picked it up yet - now would be a good time. bhpho.to/3kAbxFs
Hi.... superb & indepth review..I have been hearing some users facing some focusing issues with Sigma...since I am planning to buy one of these Zoom lens for mainly Landscape photography with some Bird & Wildlife photography which would be your final recommendation...currently there is a discount scheme on Sigma 150-600 so its infact slightly cheaper than Tamron 150-500 but that doesn't matter since i consider lens as long-term investment. I use a Sony A7RIII currently with Sony 24-105 G & Sigma14-24mm... looking at the build quality & performance of Sigma 14-24mm i was actually tilting towards Sigma but I am little confused now frankly between Sigma 150-600 DG DN OS SPORT & Tamron 150-500 Di III VXD...Thanks in advance!!
Already have the 200-600mm G lens, but might pick the Tamron as it's very compact and I think the best macro-lite lens among the three? I was surprised with how good Sigma is as well. In our monsoon season I won't even attempt to take any of them with constant drizzles/light rain. Have the Sigma 24-70mm art lens on the back and I think I'm good to go. Considering another telephoto lens because I might buy the a7 IV along with my current a7S III and use both to shoot video with creative composition/transition between the two in the edit to start my wildlife filmmaking, hopefully.
I may have missed it, but I don't really see the value of the Sigma 150-600 over the Sony 200-600.. 50mm wider sure, but I prefer the internal zoom of the 200-600 and I believe the sizes are more or less comparable ?
The price - those photographers on a budget can get to 600 for less money. That's about it.
@@photorectoby the 200-600 is at $1800 on B&H and the sigma 150-600 at $1500; so more like $300. But ok for the answer :)
@@astrodysseus I agree - with current discount on Sony it is pretty close. Sigma was $300 off the other day - that was a pretty significant savings but its gone now.
in some countries the price difference is almost $700-800 Australia, for example, the recommended retail price of the sigma is $1987 where the sony is close to $2699, sony is ridiculously overpriced here in aussie land
Thanks for this good review. I had the Sony 100-400mm and as you said, 400mm is not always enough for wildlife photography. Now trying to decide between the 200-600mm or this Sigma. Don't think I would need the 1.4x converter so the Sigma seems to be the best option today. By any chance do you have a link to download the pictures ?
I am on tour in Iceland at the moment. Will try and get some of the sample photos online soon. Thanks!
Now I’m in a pickle. Debating whether or not I should sell my 100-400 GM to buy this (and maybe put a little extra $$$ in my pocket to boot.) I’m shooting the RIV so the shutter rate being kneecapped isn’t dealbreaker for me. I love the 100-400 but you’re right I always feel like I could use some more reach.
I do a lot of landscape at the wider end so the loss of 50mm sucks, but I also have the 135GM to carry the slack on that end, which is sharper than any of the lenses on this list anyway.
So yeah, tough call.
I have shot with the 200-600, took it to the PNW last year to photograph Roosevelt elk and that lens just did not agree with me. It was heavy, I didn’t like it, and I just don’t think the results were as good as if I just took my 100-400 instead and shot in crop mode. So that one’s not an option. I sent that lens back, I just was not happy with the results.
Sorry I am a little late in replying here - it's a tough call. A 3rd option is add the 1.4x extender. If you shoot landscapes often I am not sure I would want to give up that 100.. I personally don't want to give it up.
I gave the 200-600 another try on my recent arctic workshop and I really grew to love it - yes its heavy but quality was there for me - it's the lens I will likely add for future wildlife based workshops.
Excellent video and review! I'm happy with my purchase after shooting with it over the weekend. I'm confused about programming the custom buttons. Any links or hints?
Hi Daniel! Nice - so glad you are happy with the lens. You need to go into the button customization screen (yellow menu/toolbox) and it is on the last page of buttons. I show how I use it here th-cam.com/video/FsmZVopNqxA/w-d-xo.html
@@photorectoby Can you point me in the right direction to get updated lens profiles into Lightroom Classic for this and other newer lenses?
What body were you using for the testing? I find that the focusing speed and precision is as much a function of the body as it is of the lens, especially with Sony bodies. I have the a7r3 and I know that the A1 is a different league.
I was testing with the a1
Hi! Great video, would you recommend this lenses for Sony A7II ? Do I need any adapter? Thanks
No adaptors needed, just make sure you buy a lens that say for "Sony E mount"
Iv got chromatic aberration on mine, is that normal
On APS-C, the Sony 70-350mm gives you a 525mm equivalent, and won't break your arm carrying it all day.
Would you consider using this lens on the a6000 camera
I would consider but I think the 100-400 range is probably a better fit on a crop sensor camera.
either the 100 - 400 or the tamron 100-500 if cheaper then the sigma would be a good by for the a6000, size proportions the 6000 will feel weird the heavier the lens
@@photorectoby sir I have question can we use this lens on Sony a6400 without any adptor ????
The sigma for canon.. has a removable collar.. even comes with a rubber collar 🥳
I bought the Sony A7 iv and the Sony 200-600mm lens and went out shooting my favorite wildlife subjects, warblers, kinglets and the like. Previously, I'd been using the Sony A99ii with the 70-400mm zoom and I was getting good results. The 200-600mm was fantastic at 600mm unless your subject was less than 12 yards away. Well, if you are shooting small creatures - birds, butterflies, flowers then the 200-600mm is a frustrating horror story. The nice little warbler poses on a branch 10 ft away and the lens can't find focus. I can't ask the warbler to fly further away and I can't walk back further without falling off a bank, and the bird isn't going to hang around. So, I sold it and got the Sigma. At 150mm, it is almost a macro. At 600mm the minimum focus distance is down to 7 feet. Ultimately, the Sony may be a tad sharper, but it was a poor lens for shooting small wild life. I'm really enjoying the Sigma.
Thanks for sharing your real world use. Good things to think about before purchasing.
will this lens work on the a6400
yes but I would consider the 100-400 range is probably a better fit on a crop sensor camera.
yes it will work however 600mm will receive 1.5ish x crop factor so your looking at almost 900 mm
Sweet pup :)
Greta video. I kept watching thinking oh no!!! 😱 He’s going to accidentally knock the Sony lens off the table 😮
Secret - I am surrounded by pillows on the floor ;)
Hey Toby your title is wrong...
Oops. Fixed. Thanks.
I can lock my canon one at all focal lens…
The thumbnail made me click!!! What's with the monster dog eye???
hah - he got bit by another dog a few years back and it punctured his eyeball - so it was removed. He's a good boy.
oh boy do i love fat oversized lenses!