Sigma Contemporary 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS

Sigma Contemporary 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS

Sigma
44 Gesamtbewertung
vs
Hasselblad

Hasselblad

Hasselblad
35 Gesamtbewertung

Bewertungen

Portrait
Sigma
59
Hasselblad
26
Budget
Sigma
56
Hasselblad
38
Macro
Sigma
16
Hasselblad
48
Video Cinema
Sigma
47
Hasselblad
32
Street
Sigma
46
Hasselblad
36
Landscape
Sigma
33
Hasselblad
44
Professional
Sigma
42
Hasselblad
36
Wildlife Sports
Sigma
39
Hasselblad
40
Travel
Sigma
40
Hasselblad
33

Spezifikationen

Sigma Contemporary 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OSHasselblad
Optics
Typezoom
Focal Length Min16 mm35 mm
Focal Length Max300 mm100 mm
Elements16
Groups13
Aspherical Elements3
ED Elements5
Aperture
Max Aperturef/3.5f/32
Min Aperture2.8-4
Constant
Build
MountHasselblad XCD
Formatmedium-format
Weight2.92 kg
Filter Thread86 mm
AF & Stabilization
AF Typestepping motor
Focus
Min Focus Distance500 mm
Max Magnification1:4.0

Vor- & Nachteile

Sigma Contemporary 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS

  • Strong versatility (100th percentile)100th %ile
  • Strong aperture (78th percentile)
  • Strong bokeh (76th percentile)
  • Below average macro (14th percentile)14th %ile
  • Below average optical (21st percentile)
  • Below average social proof (29th percentile)
  • Below average build (34th percentile)

Hasselblad

  • Strong optical (94th percentile)94th %ile
  • Strong af (87th percentile)87th %ile
  • Strong versatility (79th percentile)
  • Below average bokeh (3rd percentile)3rd %ile
  • Below average aperture (5th percentile)5th %ile
  • Below average build (7th percentile)7th %ile
  • Below average social proof (13th percentile)13th %ile

Fazit

Gewinner: Sigma Contemporary 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS

Scores 44 overall, wins 6 of 9 usage categories and 1 of 17 specs.

Sigma Contemporary 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS Besser bei:

BudgetStreetTravelPortraitProfessionalVideo Cinema

Hasselblad Besser bei:

MacroLandscape