My girlfriend bought the new A7r5 and while she was deciding to buy a wildlife lens, she rented a sony 200-600. Despite the stabilization offered by the r5 and the sony lens, we struggled to get sharp shots at very low speed (I'm a wildlifephotographer since years and with some experience on my shoulders). After some time spent on some reviews, talking well about the sigma sport 150-600 E mount, we decided to give it a go, and I have to say that this lens surprised us in a very positive way. The stabilization looks more effective than the sony and we had more consistency in the low shutter speed shots, the sharpness is at the same level of the Sony shots (especially in the area most used, the sensitive 600mm), and as a personal choice, the colours match more our taste, with pastels tones. The bokeh is superb, with smooth tones passages. We couldn't be more than happy, considering that in Australia we paid it $800 less. AH, I forgot!! In the bag, is smaller. ;) Thanks for the video and for your work Ciao
Very interesting to hear your feedback! I definitely can agree with what you mentioned from my experience with the two. Sigma is the best bang for buck brand in my opinion 🙌🏻
Sony all the way. Here’s why: 1. Internal zoom is better. No dust sucked in. 2. With the lens hood on, I never use the lens cap. 3. You can replace the foot/collar with an Arca Swiss. 4. You don’t buy and use a 600mm zoom to shoot at 100mm. 5. Image quality. 6. Image quality
I've been shooting push-pull external zooms for 7 years and never had a problem with dust being sucked in... that's definitely over exaggerated in my opinion. 2 and 3 are a yes, but they also are not ideal which is the point in the comparison. And I personally shoot wildlife a decent amount at 150mm and fully zoomed out, depends on your style and ability to simplify a scene at wider lengths. And yes image quality is better, but marginally.
My girlfriend bought the new A7r5 and while she was deciding to buy a wildlife lens, she rented a sony 200-600.
Despite the stabilization offered by the r5 and the sony lens, we struggled to get sharp shots at very low speed (I'm a wildlifephotographer since years and with some experience on my shoulders).
After some time spent on some reviews, talking well about the sigma sport 150-600 E mount, we decided to give it a go, and I have to say that this lens surprised us in a very positive way.
The stabilization looks more effective than the sony and we had more consistency in the low shutter speed shots, the sharpness is at the same level of the Sony shots (especially in the area most used, the sensitive 600mm), and as a personal choice, the colours match more our taste, with pastels tones. The bokeh is superb, with smooth tones passages.
We couldn't be more than happy, considering that in Australia we paid it $800 less.
AH, I forgot!! In the bag, is smaller. ;)
Thanks for the video and for your work
Ciao
Very interesting to hear your feedback! I definitely can agree with what you mentioned from my experience with the two. Sigma is the best bang for buck brand in my opinion 🙌🏻
Thanks for sharing another wonderful video like always Jeremy, looking forward to see more bird videos from you soon 🐦👌🤗
Thank you!! ☺️🙌🏻
Sony all the way. Here’s why: 1. Internal zoom is better. No dust sucked in. 2. With the lens hood on, I never use the lens cap. 3. You can replace the foot/collar with an Arca Swiss. 4. You don’t buy and use a 600mm zoom to shoot at 100mm. 5. Image quality. 6. Image quality
I've been shooting push-pull external zooms for 7 years and never had a problem with dust being sucked in... that's definitely over exaggerated in my opinion. 2 and 3 are a yes, but they also are not ideal which is the point in the comparison. And I personally shoot wildlife a decent amount at 150mm and fully zoomed out, depends on your style and ability to simplify a scene at wider lengths. And yes image quality is better, but marginally.