31 Replies to “Sigma 60-600 Sport Lens REVIEW vs Sigma 150-600 | The BEST Wildlife / Sports lens for $2,000?”

  1. on APS-C Canon bodies the Sigma "C" 150-600mm = 240-960mm, it's Pin sharp both ends and lighter than 60-600mm. Weather sealing, pointless as rain=clouds=low light, V bad for slow zooms as high ISO=loss of sharpness usually and bad cropped images, add that to most wildlife hides when its raining so why pay for weather sealing. I went for Sigma f4 24-105 "A", Sigma 150-600mm "C" plus 1.4x T.C. My legs fill in for the missing 100+mm. Other options spend tens of thousands on long focal length standard lenses which are faster and weather sealed and still end up cropping. My most bang for bucks was all pin sharp Sigma; 10-20mm f3.5 EX, 50mm f1.4 "A", 105mm f2.8 Macro EX (best out there), 24-105mm f4 "A", 150-600mm "C". I have the latest Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 VC USD which has to be the worst lens I have ever used, slow, 200mm+ out of focus blurred images, PANTS!!!

  2. I had a 150 – 500 for many years and the zoom got much looser with time. If I angled down, it would creep depending on the angle.

  3. Hey Jared,
    I bought one of these and within 30 minutes the Auto Focus crapped out. I had to return it but I have to say the $2K for me would have been worth it. I miss it so much even though I only held it for about an hour. When contacting the vendor they had never heard of the problem and called it a fluke but over time I found 3 instances on B&H reviews that had the same problem. For whatever reason the AF just died. I used it on my Canon 80d and the pics were amazing. Just felt I should warn folks if they are on the fence. I so wish I could bring myself to buy it over but I am scared to take a $2K chance. Since your video have you or anyone else run into this? Thanks Tom

  4. I'm a long time 150-600 C user….I almost always need more than 600mm and hardly ever need less than 150mm. I think this is the case for most people which makes this lens creation pretty stupid…why dont Sigma spend time making a 600mm prime at F4 or even a lightweight F5.6 to rival the 500mm PF from Nikon

  5. I have the 150-600c paired with nikons d500 and love it. I dont feel theres a need to upgrade I mostly use the lens from 300mm to 600mm…i hand hold it walking around the zoo several times a month.

  6. I got a 150-600 sport by accident, thought it was a contemporary 2 months ago and wondered why it feels like I have been working out at a gym! Two months in and I can probably shoot for 20 minutes without arm shake and operate the Zoom. To Zoom out point camera down, Zoom in point upwards seems to help a great deal. Have to say it seems to lack the fringing at 150 you seemed to get at 60. I think this lens really comes into its own at 300 – 600mm and gives really nice background blurring (bokeh) on nature shots and wild life shots, with subject being sharp. I live in Central Australia, very hot with dust storms so the superior build and weather sealing is probably a good idea. I shoot hand held and the image stabilisation even at 600mm has not let me down. Also slipped the lens mount handle on top and found hanging the camera off one hand and operating with the other seemed to enable better use than having the handle under the camera. All in all the 150mm difference means you have to place yourself with fore thought not being able to rely on the 60mm which is not hard in a wide open county. The image quality is not the really the issue here it's definitely weight, some people will loose shots and find moving the 150-600mm a pain in the neck and if I drop it I reckon it would rip the lens mount off the Canon Mk III I use off. If you can handle the weight the 150 won't let you down.

  7. I was curious being a sports lens, how would it perform with fast moving subjects, such as racing events and how it might cope with different lights, such as dusk or night for example.

  8. Best review about this lens I've ever watched on YouTube !

    Can you please make a review of Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS ? As this lens is also a super zoom lens, and I've notice that not many people are making review of this lens on YouTube….

  9. Ok so it sucked at 60mm for bad fringing, but was it ok at 80mm? 100mm? 120mm? I'm amazed you did not test when the fringing became acceptable or at least mentioned it.

  10. In the South, it was called Lionel "PlayWorld" — guess y'all called it Lionel "KiddieCity" up north. LOL

  11. Very nice lens. I’d definitely look at this (60-600) if I didn’t already have a Nikon 200-500 which is incredible on my Nikon D500. Sigmas really making some great lenses now.

  12. Should I stay with 200-500 Nikon in d500 or is the 60-600 better for wildlife . I like the extra reach

  13. I have been wondering how this 60-600mm performs at the 600 end. Your informative review has answered that question, thanks.

  14. where is the „vs“ part? I thought this would be a comparison against the 150-600 sports. A lot of blabla about cartoons and mario bros, but what about sharpness of those 2 lenses? You did a great job in the nikon comparison to the tamron. I don’t have a problem with side jokes, they make the video entertaining but in this video is almost no information why I should buy this one over the 150-600

  15. I have the 150 to 600 c but I wanted the wider range 0f the 60 to 600 , I will be packing this to Patagonia next week.along with nikon's 28 to 300. I hope it will be able to stand-up to the field test. weight may be a factor. want to carry 2 lenses not 3 or 4.

  16. I have the A7R III and the Canon 5D Mark IV, I am in doubt which is the best zoom lens option I should buy, Sony 10-400mm or Sigma 60-600mm, where can I use the MC-11 adapter for sony, Could you Give me an idea of ​​which one I should buy? I'm scared, maybe sigma will not work well on sony, with the mc-11 adapter, and sony is my main point.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *