Sigma 60-600mm F4.5-6.3 Sport sample gallery

Most shooters end up sharpening their bird/ animal shots to the point of weirdness. There can be a set of environmental conditions when every feather / fur detail will not be visible. At least in the wild.

Maybe but you have 50MP and when resized to 20MP it will compensate for some of the noise and sharpness.
And there is much more to an image than noise or sharpness.

This lens will also be used with DX DSLR’s so the pixel density will be about the same.

It is heavy and not a walk-around lens by no means. It does give u a wide range of zoom and if weight is not an issue, why not?

@BOS:
I'm pretty sure you're joking about whether this is the right indoor lens. It's obviously not nearly wide or fast enough. Not a great travel lens either unless the purpose of your trip is to rake photos, as opposed to traveling being primary and photos being secondary.

I'm waiting for someone to say "Canon color!" 🙂

Lightroom color. Plain and simple. And if we're talking about jpeg output, well, hell if i know cuz i don't care about that. Anything I'm serious about gets RAW-processed.

Only Leicaphiles argue that their cameras/lenses create magical unmatchable color. Which of course is beyond stupid.

Hey, i freely admit you could totally be right. I'm not familiar with the other programs. I tried DXO and Capture One but quickly got frustrated with the interface and quit the free trial after just a couple days simply because i have LR burned into muscle memory. I'm not a fan of LR"s interface and that's why i tried the others. Frankly, I'd love to ditch LR. But it was taking me so long to get anything done in the new software cuz i didn't know what i was doing. So i just fell back on the devil i know.

But that's kinda my point. Even with LR you can make pretty much any RAW look like any other company's RAW, after processing for color, provided they're shot with pretty equivalent gear. Canon's nothing special there. It's jpeg shooters like Ken Rockwell that bloviate about "Canon color". Shoot RAW and PP and every camera has spectacular color. Except for Leica, HAHAHA! 😂

Well... I have (and love) the latest Nikon 80-400 lens and use the 80 as much as I use the 400.... it depends on your subject matter. I use the 400 for bird photography... I use the 80 for bushes, tree, flowers, butterflies and other items that are much closer. Being able to handle a lens and carry it all day on a sling strap is very handy. I would certainly welcome a 300-600 that is about the same size for what I do... but - the shorter end is very handy as well!

I agree with you as well. Seems like there's plenty of good lenses around the 200mm and below range. I wonder how much smaller they could make the lens if it was a 300-600mm or if they kept the size the same, how much the aperture could improve?

The whole point of this lens if to have a wide zoom range. It can be very useful in many situations when suddenly a wider angle is needed and there is no time to change lenses. Like a safari for example. If someone does not need the wide end, there are other 150-600 variants

I have a 150-600 mm Sigma and primarily use it for wildlife photography, quite often I am using the 150mm end and wouldn't mind being able to go to 60mm. The thing is wildlife moves especially birds and you find yourself frequently using the lower end with animals. I can also see value when I am snapping whitewater sports. Swapping lenses is not always an option with wildlife.

Dp reviews opening comment
The Sigma 60-600mm F4.5-6.3 Sport is quite the beast, and will likely appeal to those looking to photograph wildlife, airshows and all manner of distant subjects. We've discovered that it's actually quite a handy lens for casual, everyday shooting – if you'd like your photographic pursuit to double as an upper body workout. Take a look at how we've been getting along with it.

Yes, I asked my 90 year old grandmother and she is using a 7.5 lb dumbbell for her upper body workout ;-)

Lol yeah... 8ish-pounds is a "workout" to DPR...

To channel some Trump here, what kind of pencil-necks are running this joint? FF 600mm at about 8-pounds total with body is actually pretty darn "floaty", particularly when you figure that you've also got a 300mm, 200mm, 135mm, and 60mm on you...

They’re exhausted from all the bike riding they have to do for those focus tests.

Lol, DPR staff really need to get and use a gym membership! 😄

The problem isn't in using the lens - I'd typically hand-hold it for 2 hours max. But carrying it around in a backpack is a recipe for chronic lower back pain, especially if one needs to bring more stuff or hike around for days.

Indeed, Kharan!

As Edward Weston once joked, “anything more than 500 yards from the car just isn't photogenic.” I expect that is the philosophy of the macho commenters above...

Actually funny you bring that up. I had one guy who apparently didn't know that much about long teles, bring a Tamron 150-600 to an outdoor portrait shoot once. He could barely hold it in addition to it being probably the wrong lens given the subject matter.

The RX10 is nowhere near as good, especially in more difficult light. Plus you have to deal with a slow electronic zoom