SIGMA AF 50-500 / F4-6.3

[kahfluie]

Was wondering if anyone has had the opportunity to use the SIGMA AF 50-500 F4-6.3 APO HSM Lens - if so what were your thoughts?

[Jack_C]

Its also known as the Bigma if your reading on the net.

Great value in a 50-500mm lens at appx $765US, excellent finish on it, looks real nice. As far as performance, it can take quite sharp shots on a tripod. Some have even managed well handholding but it is long and heavy when extended if your holding it up for a while.

The lens suffers from vignetting, very much seen on full frame cameras, and still seen on 1.6x crops if shooting birds against sky or planes etc. It can be corrected in PS CS, if shooting RAW. The HSM focus system is better than consumer zooms like the 70-300APO, but not a quick as Canons ring USM.

If you have a price limit under $800 and dont mind a heavier zoom consider it.

Other options are the newer 80-400 Sigma OS, image stablized lens, and the more expensive Canon 100-400L IS. Another choice is a Canon 300mm IS prime, all you get is 300mm but it will do that better than the others.

Heres a gallery of shots I made with a Bigma, since sold. I miss being able to pull back to 50mm, I went with the Canon 100-400IS and find overall I get better handheld results, both sharpness and color/contrast, but the Bigma had its good points too.

Buy with a return policy just in case and be sure you want a bigger lens.

http://www.pbase.com/jackcnd/sigma_50500

[CyberDyneSystems]

I too used this lens as my primary "birding-wildlife" lens for nearly a year. I only sold it after I purchased a used 500mm prime,. at which point i only needed the one MONSTER lens...

Jack's description pretty much sums it up,. (allthough I don't know what he means about the Vignetting?)

An excellent value in a very flexible outdoor lens

http://images.fotopic.net/?id=886830&outx=980&oq=0&noresize=1&nostamp=1

http://images.fotopic.net/?id=1214031&outx=980&oq=0&noresize=1&nostamp=1

[fox1]

http://www.pbase.com/jackcnd/sigma_50500

Great shots there! Any samples with the Canon 100-400 Jack?

[scottbergerphoto]

http://www.pbase.com/jackcnd/sigma_50500

Great shots there! Any samples with the Canon 100-400 Jack?
Hope you don't mind my chiming in. The following shots were all done with the 100-400IS L:

http://www.pbase.com/scottbergerphoto/faces_in_the_park
Scott

[timmyquest]

http://www.pbase.com/jackcnd/sigma_50500

Great shots there! Any samples with the Canon 100-400 Jack?
Hope you don't mind my chiming in. The following shots were all done with the 100-400IS L:

http://www.pbase.com/scottbergerphoto/faces_in_the_park
Scott

Those shots help enforce a conclusion i came to about a week ago in that the 50-500 does not compair to the 100-400 and the extra 100mm is far from worth the differences that i've seen.

Time after time i see shots that were taken by the canon and my jaw drops, i've honestly yet to see a shot like that taken from the sigma. I wish that i could...i hate that i have to spend 1500 on a lens that does what i want it to. But thats the way the world works, you...as always said, get what you pay for.

Within the next few months i hope to be getting the 100-400mm L

[Jack_C]

Yes, here's some 100-400L shots, while the Bigma worked well and is a great value, I just preferred the outcome with the Canon IS lens, but it does cost almost 2x as much.

View at original size for best results...

100-400L with a 1.4x converter:
http://www.pbase.com/jackcnd/100_400_with_14x

100-400L no converter:
http://www.pbase.com/jackcnd/airport

[scottbergerphoto]

This was taken with the 100-400 and 2x TC, manual focus:
http://www.pbase.com/image/23527173.jpg
Scott

[sjprg]

Some 50-500 images/
I'm happy with mine. At under $800.00 its certinly the best bang for the buck.

http://www.pbase.com/sjprg/ed_levine_park

Paul

[Jack_C]

For the price its a great value:

Bigma Gallery:
http://www.pbase.com/jackcnd/zoo_boxing_day

http://www.pbase.com/image/24485680/original.jpg

[scottbergerphoto]

For the price its a great value:

Bigma Gallery:
http://www.pbase.com/jackcnd/zoo_boxing_day

http://www.pbase.com/image/24485680/original.jpg
What a beautiful picture! The exposure is super. I looked at the other ones in the gallery as well. You clearly have a good method of exposure and composition. Many of the pictures look soft however. Did you do any USM?
Scott

[Jack_C]

Thanks Scott for the comments.

I generally resize then apply USM at appx 300 .2, sometimes twice. I don't like too much USM, but your right some of those could use a touch more.

[ChrisNardone]

Thanks Scott for the comments.

I generally resize then apply USM at appx 300 .2, sometimes twice. I don't like too much USM, but your right some of those could use a touch more.

Those shots are right on for my taste. I wouldn't want any more USM for my taste. Not with that subject. Really impressive pictures. In fact, your pictures have me thinking about the 50-500.

[eric1]

hey Jack,
you gotta link for a 50-500, at $765?

thanks,
eric

[ChrisNardone]

hey Jack,
you gotta link for a 50-500, at $765?

thanks,
eric

http://www.deltainternational.com/store/Item_SGL50%2D500C.htm

I haven't bought from them, but here it is for $765. They are rated 9.88.

http://www.resellerratings.com/seller1832.html

[eric1]

thanks Chris,
i'll look into it. i think their fairly safe.

eric

[Jack_C]

Yes I purchased from Delta, I found them great to deal with.

[sjprg]

I purchased mine from Delta also

[kahfluie]

Glad to see some folks were happy with Delta International... I was wondering since a lot of their prices are much lower than other reputable vendors. In some cases, like the Sigma 50-500, they are over $200 lower.

Now the question becomes, do I hold out and save for Canon glass, or get this one. Decisions decisions!

[Jack_C]

With Sigma lenses, Delta is lower as they sell the "International Version" with a 1 year warranty. The version BH sells comes with a longer US warranty, 4 years I think. Many would rather save the money and just go with a 1 year warranty.

[kahfluie]

Well, now I'm going to show my ignorance... I was looking at this lens, but most of what I read is that this is a pretty good "outdoor" lens. Most of my shooting is done indoors... concerts, etc. Some outdoors. I have other lenses I use... a Promaster 28-200 which I'm told is made by Tamron, I also have the Canon 50mm f1.8 and a the Canon 75-300 II which to be honest I'm not happy with - I just don't feel I'm getting good sharp images with that lens.

Money is a factor, I won't lie... therefore am I better off getting the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 APO HSM SLD which Delta International sells for $613 AND also purchase the 2X expander, or would the 50-500 f4 - 6.3 be suffice for both indoor and outdoor photography? Basically the 70-200 plus expander would bring me to around the same cost of the 50-500 alone.

Thoughts?

[CyberDyneSystems]

For indoor shooting you are DEFINATELY better off with the f/2.8!!

The 50-500mm is f/6.3 at 500mm.... thats pretty slow,. and it needs sunlight to really give you the shutter speeds you need to work at 500mm

With the 70-200mm you will get 200mm @ f/2.8 which is pretty good for indoor lighting. If you need to try and do it all with one lens,. then indeed a 2X at an additional $150.00 is a thrifty way to get a 140-400mm @ f/5.6

With the 2X you will loose some clarity,. but it is a reasonable exchange to give you the f/2.8 @ 200mm when you need it. That lens and a 2X will certianly tide you over long enough for you to decide how much you need a dedicated 400mm/500mm lens in your arsenal,. meantime 70-200mm is something evryone can use for sure.

[kahfluie]

Thanks, CDS - I was feeling that way and will probably end up getting the 70-200mm f2.8 and extender. Once I have this, I"ll just save up for some L glass (or very good 3rd party lens). Does anyone have experience with this lens? (the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 )

[Jack_C]

A fast lens seems best for your needs.

Check into the Sigma 70-200 2.8, I've seen recently a number of owners posting CA issues.

Other popular lenses for indoor use are the Canon primes, 135 f/2 L, 85 f1.8, etc. If you can move around to frame those will produce excellent results, Canon's sharpest, and are small, light and black.

And of course Canon's 70-200 2.8's zooms.

[CyberDyneSystems]

A pile of reviews,. including mine,. and some sample pics to link to.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=102&sort=7&thecat=29

[sjprg]

If you are shooting anything over 50 ft, stay away from the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L. This is a great lens for shooting a full frame image, BUT is is horrible in a landscape situtation or any object less than about 3/4 frame. The resolution at distance is pitiful. I've had mine to Canon service twice with no improvement.

You can see some of them at www.pbase.com/sjprg Various other lenes are posted also. Actually the lowly 75-300 III non IS does a very creditable job. I still think the Sigma 50-500 is the best bang for the buck

[kahfluie]

Welp.... I did it.... today I ordered the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 (at $613 plus shipping) from the folks at Delta International, whom, I might add, were very friendly and easy to work with via email. A few emails because of my shipping address and because the Hoya UV filter I wanted was not in stock and bingo the transaction was complete (many thanks to Henny for her assistance). The folks at Delta International get two thumbs up from me!

So... it's being overnighted to me and I should get it some time tomorrow at work... hmmm... wonder if I can get off work early to put it to use.

I also ordered the sigma 2x teleconverter from B&H... should get that by week's end. I had "some" buyer's remorse... then I told wife what I bought and she didn't finch, so... now it's ok to do the snoopy dance!!! :D

Any tips about this lens that I can use??

As always, thanks to all here for their comments suggestions etc.

[kahfluie]

Folks... just wanted to followup on the Sigma 20-200. All I can say is WOW!

Took a few shots and already I can see a big difference in shots taken with this lens compared to my other lenses. I have only one comment - whether it's negative or not, you decide. In shots in which I zoom more than say 125mm, the "focal length" in my Exif goes off ther wall. In a photo I took today, the exif indicates 456mm. The darn lens only goes to 200. I called Sigma and they told me that the lens, when used on a digital is automatically multiplied by the crop factor, which on the 10D is 1.6. Well, that's hog wash because even if that was true, 200 times 1.6 is only 320mm! So, I'm a little upset about the focal length not being accurate on the exif, but I am excited at the photos I am able to take with this lens.

Based on my usage this afternoon and seeing the results... I'd recommend it to folks.