I wish you showed sample images to show what you mean by the sports lens was sharper, every other video I’ve seen say sharpness was about the same and with no noticeable difference in image quality. One video also showed comparison shots at different focal lengths and apertures and stated he could see no difference.
Excellent video man, very well explained in detail, now I know which one to buy, you already have a new follower, I wish you much success, I send you hugs from Peru
Adding a UV filter does not reduce lens flaring. In fact, adding another glass surface is likely to increase flaring or ghosting. A super multi coated filter is less likely to add flare than using a non multicoated filter. 2.8 meters is not the lens minimum focussing distance, it's the lens minimum autofocus distance. Mine manually focusses to under 2.6 meters. Sample variation can make either lens sharper than the other when comparing any pair of contemporary and sport lenses. On average I would expect the sport to be a bit sharper. Cheap filters can destroy sharpness. I tried a cheap polaroid filter, it created a donut of blurriness between center and edge of frame.
I've seen other comparisons between these two lenses where the Contemporary was sharper, so I think on the average they're probably about even. I've never tried the sports version, but I do own the Contemporary, and I certainly have no complaints about the sharpness. By the way, very few people use UV filters now. Every digital camera already has an inbuilt UV filter (sitting on the sensor) which is probably better. And the filter offers no protection whatsoever against damages. The front element of the lens is much sturdier that any filter. So the only value of a UV filter is protection against getting dust, dirt, grease and grime onto the lens. So if you think that's a problem, by all means get a filter.
I'm not good in english so I can't understand 100% what you saying, but this video really helped choose the lens between C and S. Thanks for sharing the video!
If money is of no concern, then 9 times out of ten, you should go for the more expensive item, but if cost is a concern, then you need a lot more nuance. This is the main reason I opted for the Contemporary version.
Great video! I've only noticed one issue, in "Filter Size" section, you show a screen shot of the 105mm at 160 pounds, not 200 pounds. Thanks a lot for all this data! Cheers!
Great video thanks. Did you notice any difference in auto focus speed and accuracy between the two lenses? How well weather sealed is the contemporary version?
after seeing the comments I already understand about the weather seal feature and build quality, but I'm getting confused about the sharpness of these two lenses because some people think the c version lens is sharper
ive seen about 10 videos on both of these lenses and some of them where pro photographers and they could almost not see any different in image quality on these, but the sport was a tad sharper, but for any amateur or hobby photographer it wouldnt be noticed and for under 1000$ it was more bargain than the sport lens.
thank you for that comparison. good information. the video is sadly a bit too long. i wished there were more original pictures oder videos that were shot with these lenses. thank you
If weight is an issue then the Sigma 600-600mm really makes sense. But where this 60-600mm 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.
It's not be adding of the glass element that help reduces lens flaring, it's the coating of that new glass element that reduces light scattering, the primary cause of lens flaring and a lack of contrast. I hope that helps
@@PhotoFeaver The same elements that are under the filter will still create the same amount of lens flaring. The coating of the filter does not change the light passing through it to the lens, it just means that a multi coated filter exhibits less flaring than a non coated filter. The lens elements will still create the same amount of flare, otherwise all lens manufacturers would need to do to fix lens flare would be to add more multicoating.
Hello. I was curious what the difference between the 2 lenses is for continuous shooting?? I do photos for my son's baseball team and do a lot of burst/continuous shooting to try to catch plays. I have always had Nikor lenses for my Nikon D7500, so just seeing if there is significant difference between the contemporary vs the sports. Thanks.
I don’t think he covered weather sealing during build quality. For wildlife photographers who shoot in tropic or rainy environments, the weather sealing in the sport lens is priceless. As a 1dx shooter, having a fully weather sealed setup is fantastic. Does get extremely heavy pairing a 1dx2 with the sport but eh. It rains a lot where I live haha
@@user-yw2si2hm3u so they both lens have same weather sealing? no differences? the difference just is the mention of the name of the weather sealing feature?
@@user-yw2si2hm3u pretty sure the difference is in how they weather seal the lens. Contemporary it’s only the rear element whereas sport the whole barrel is weather sealed. Either way I’ve been shooting with my camera in the rain and I haven’t had any issues
The Sigma Sports lens is fairly easy to handheld, but I do recommend either using a tripod or monopod for extended uses. But yes the big benefit is better where the ceiling and overall build quality.
Great video. In NZ the C lens is $1800NZD as opposed to the S lens which is $2900. Im trying to decide whether the extra $1100 will be worth it for the sport lens, as i plan on doing motorsport photography. Is there much difference between the autofocus on the 2 lenses?
Go for sport mate. I have Sport version for Canon EF and Canon EXT 2x III and this setup is amazing with R6. Was abelto get usable quality even at forest where you need to pump ISO a litle. Mostly did 1500-2000 ISO and only pixel peeping shows grain there. Auto focus and eye tedection works well. I did do some tuning with Sigma doc by reducing focusing speed and limited focusing area to far end. Cheap 1200mm there and with APS-C 1920mm.
@@KoneStone1 interesting that the sport was fine. People find that with the C the autofocus "pulses". Anyways I ended up getting the C, but am getting rid of it now as I have a 400mm 2.8 and a 1.4x converter now.
Im shocked the twice as expnsive lens from the same manufacturer is better 😂. And unfortunately the price has exploded 1049 € for the contemporary with 1.4 extender , 999.89 without , and 1900 for the sports.
If you want to do the sharpness the right way, First you never even stated what camera you was using, and secondly put said Camera on full auto to take out any bias from i prefer the sport
an you do review of Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG DN OS Sport and the Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary video and photo stabilization put the milimeter how far and distance the video and photo take lake video & photo in 200mm , video & photo in 300mm in video in 400mm , video & photo in 500mm and video & photo in 600mm how it perform in video and photo stabilization thanks
There is no need to compare at all. All indicators of the sports model are better than the C model, but the weight and volume are larger and heavier. This is obvious from visual observation. You can know the advantages and disadvantages from the price positioning. Your so called "Compare" is a bit redundant~
