Essentially, the Sigma 150-500 OS is an indirect answer to the Canon 100-400mm F4 IS L lens. The problem with most comparisons is that the Canon F4 costs significantly more.
The direct point is that the Canon does perform marginally better in every aspect. The Sigma clearly wins in cost-performance ratio but that also varies based on your intended use and preferences. The main difference is the 70%+ price in the lenses.
The Sigma 150-500 is *NOT* a substitute for a low-light high speed use telephoto lens such as F2.8 lenses. However, the 2.8 lenses are an apples to oranges comparison – comparing a 400mm 2.8 that costs several times more ($6500) and suited to a different purpose. The Sigma lens is suited more towards daytime wildlife as opposed to sports events in varying conditions or poor lighting in any situation.
The 150-500 has shortcomings compared to the more expensive lenses – which is typically the case for any brand. I still highly recommend the lens & have enjoyed 600+ pictures within 7 days of owning it. The lens is excellent for wildlife, a great “out-of-box” experience with accessories, and will serve most a long time.
+ Optics are outstanding considering the market price.
+ Less than $1000 USD as of this writing
+ 500mm without use of a teleconverter
- Not as sharp compared to the 50-500 Sigma but the 50-500 lacks OS/IS
+ Light build quality considering lens class
- Durability trade-off for lower weight. Sealing not optimal, housing uses plastic.
+ Aesthetics. Rubberized/tactile feel with a sleek dark gray body.
- Aesthetics/durability. Coating on body prone to marks/scratches.
- Stiff zoom ring takes effort to operate.
+ Durable OEM lens hood included
+ Solid OEM hard lens case included (in fact it is shipped in the case)
+ OEM Tripod collar included
+ Excellent industry warranty (3 years USA)
+ HSM motor quick but not the fastest.
- Seeks a bit for focus in less-than-optimal light a bit earlier than the Canon equivalents.
- Auto
Sigma 150 500mm f