First time post. Expectations for this lens too high?

[Nature Man]

You need to test your lens for sharpness using a proven setup. Steve posted this one and it works. Here is the link: https://backcountrygallery.com/lens-sharpness-testing/

Steve mentioned shooting indoors if possible and I agree, however, if it's a very calm day it will work.

FWIW: Most of the time the issue is the technique, not the equipment.

Good shooting to you.

 

[Capelle Ch]

You have to close a little (f7.1 or f8). Never fully zoomed (500 mm max). Be careful to deactivate the VR if on a tripod. If you shoot continuously on a tripod, you will see (if VR is ON) that your AF will move. If VR off, focus will remain. Otherwise, I have had the Sigma 150-600 C for several years and no worries on both a D7100 and a D850. I also have a 300 PF and the difference is not huge apart from the opening of course and especially the weight. My 300 PF is useful to me at the same time in street photography, animal in marraude, portrait, etc ..., that's why, I skipped on the 500 PF

 

[Capelle Ch]

Voici des p hotos prises avec le 150-600 mm

 

[Blue tit photo]

Hi folks,

First time post here. Love the site and, of course, Steve's material and work! My wife and I love birds, have lots of feeders around the house, so wanted to start taking bird photos with my Nikon D750. I realize there is quite a price vs performance scale in lenses, so thought I would look at the lower priced end of the scale. I was debating between the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary and Sport and after reading some reviews, and thinking of my wife being able to maneuver the rig handheld, I pulled the trigger on the Contemporary. While I have not done a lot of shooting with it, I was shooting the other day about 15-25 feet from the subjects. I did both handheld leaning against a door, and also shot on my very sturdy Induro tripod with gimbal head. When I pixel peeped and pushed the button that zooms in 100% on the camera, I was kind of disappointed. I really thought the beaks and some feathers would have been sharper, but I am new to this, so not really sure. Clearly, I'm not shooting to blow them up like that and print them. I'm just trying to use the zoom in feature to determine a) do I have a back or front focus issue with the AF, and b) is this the sharpness I should expect from this lens.

I am totally new to shooting at these long focal lengths, but these are relatively stationary subjects at what I thought were good shutter speeds. I am posting a few below (two of which were shot through windows) and was hoping you might be able to share insights, judgement, experience, etc. to help me gauge what I should expect from this lens. Also, would be interesting to hear thoughts on what lenses to look at if I do want to step up. For example, is there a real noticeable improvement by going to the Sigma Sport version? If not, what's next? Thanks in advance!!

Dark Eyed Junco from tripod w/gimbal head. 1/1000, F6 500mm, ISO 1130
View attachment 14173

Cardinal from tripod w/gimbal head. 1/1600, F6 500mm, ISO 1600.
View attachment 14174

Coopers hawk handheld leaned against and shooting through double paned glass door. 1/2000, F6 500mm, ISO800
View attachment 14175

Mockingbird tripod w/gimbal head shooting through double pane glass window. 1/4000, f6.3 600mm ISO 400
View attachment 14176

I suggest that you stop down to f8 if possible. Most lenses are sharper when stopped down

 

[Ralph]

It appears that only the Coppers Hawk had the best lighting and that certainly is the sharpest of the four. I think that the low light conditions also contributed to the lack of sharpness of the other three images. Im sure that under better lighting conditions you success rate will improve.

 

[James C.]

Greetings, and welcome to the group!

Just to add a little to the conversation, I noticed that all of your shots seem to be on dimly lit, snow-filled background, days. For the bird photography that I've been doing in similar conditions, I have been experimenting/learning how to use my EV settings to help make a brighter image. This may (after the fact) give you a brighter image to evaluate your lens' focus. With overcast skies, and snowy environments, I am finding that setting an EV from +1.3 to +2.0 tends to give me brighter images and helps bring out details. That being said, you might be better able to see in the photo how your focus is doing. (I shoot with a Nikon D500 and Nikkor 200-500mm lens, by the way.)

Also, when I was moving from a Nikkor 18-300mm lens to a longer lens, so that I could do bird photography, back in 2019, I read a lot of reviews, watched a lot of YouTube video reviews and initially was considering the Nikon 200-500mm, Tamron and Sigma 150-600mm lenses. I ended up asking the opinion of a professional photographer (not a wildlife photographer as far as I know) what his thoughts were on my choices. He said, without hesitation, if you're shooting Nikon, get a Nikon lens. You're usually better off with auto-focus speed/accuracy, and image quality (IQ) with a lens that's made by the same company that made the camera body because they have tested THEIR lenses with THEIR bodies and optimized how they will work together. I've also read/heard that since third-party lens companies aren't able to always test their lenses with EVERY other company's camera bodies, and optimize them to those bodies, they have to "average" their lenses to work FAIRLY well for everyone's cameras.

Based on this, my thoughts are, whenever possible, to save up one's money and buy lenses made by the same manufacturer as the camera body.