-=REVIEW=- Battle of the 500mm Primes. Canon Vs. Sigma

[CyberDyneSystems]

Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS Vs. Sigma 500mm f/4.5 EX HSMI recently acquired the vaunted EF 500mm f/4L IS which has now replaced my long time standard Sigma 500mm f/4.5 EX as my primary birding lens.

A straight review of the Canon lens is almost unnecessary.. at this point people know well enough that these big Canon primes are almost without fault for image quality and performance. So merely adding my name to the list of fanboys is hardly worth the typing time. Nobody doesn't want the best.. it's just a matter of how to get it and how much it will cost!

However,. I did see that my experience with the Sigma version over the last few years could be a service. To date I have seen but one other side by side comparison.
First Impressions and ergonomics:

Overall Build Quality: TIE
Although they certainly differ in appearance,. both lenses appear to give an equal impression of overall build quality. That being rock solid top notch.

WEIGHT: Winner, Sigma
The Canon weighs in at 8.53 pounds, the Sigma 6.8 for close to a 2 Lb difference.

Manual Focus Ring: Winner, Sigma
On my copies the Sigma focus ring is far smoother to turn and more tactile as far as material. I have found the same conclusion when I compared other EX lenses to Canon L lenses.

Other Controls: Winner, Canon
The Sigma AF/MF switch and focus limit switches, though easier to find,. stand too proud and thus are very prone to being tripped accidentally. In fact it is almost impossible to remove the Sigma from its case without this act turning the AF/MF switch to "manual". The Canon switches are recessed well,. and yet still easy to use. I have yet to see any of them get "bumped". There are also a lot of additional controls, such as the focus stop buttons on the front end of the barrel and the focus preset switches and ring.

Lens Collar: Winner, Sigma
The Sigma's collar is superior in several ways.
It is mounted toward the front of the lens,. as opposed to the rear,. so it is completely out of the way regarding controls on both the lens and camera, and tripod head. I find that this makes the lens seem to balance more easily.
The tripod collar is much smoother,. allowing you turn the lens in the collar easier and with less jerkiness. It is in fact "butter smooth" on the Sigma. It feels like it is on roller bearings. The Canon isn't bad,. but it's not as good. I feel the front mount and larger diameter of the ring on the Sigma must contribute to this,. by balancing the lens better there is less sideways force,. and thus less friction.

Tripod Mounting FOOT: Winner, Sigma
Again the Sigma has gone the extra mile on the little things. The Tripod foot is longer,. allowing more leeway to balance the lens with T-cons being added,. and it has four threaded mounting holes,. two 1/4" and two 3/8" The Canon has only two total. The canon is shorter. The grip surfaces when used as a carrying handle are about equal.


Included Case: Winner, Sigma
The Canon provides a very sturdy hard case that looks sadly a lot like a professional Make up artists case. Other than for shipping, it is of no use to a photographer at all. Yes it will protect the lens better, but again, I will never actually put the 500mm in that case until the say I sell it. The sigma case is a soft case that is a practical way to carry it into the field. It's not perfect, if it had more room for an attached body and additional pouches for filters etc, it could be a serious contender for field carry.

Lens Hood: Winner, Canon
This was tougher to call. the Canon is more significant,. deeper and clearly doing a better job. It is easier to mount and remove. But the Sigma hood has a more substantial feel,. and when it is mounted it is far more secure. The Canon will break very easily,. (and is in fact prone to it) The Sigma seems less likely to do so.

Ergonomic impressions summed:
Some of my findings may be a surprise to a lot of you,.
...but it was what I have come to expect in fact.

Sigma may not always be Canon's equal in optics and focus speed etc.. But I have found that with there EX line Sigma seems to try and "outdo" Canon and Nikon on the things that they "can" beat them at,.. and this is where Sigma EX lenses can, and often in my opinion do, succeed in being "better" than the OEM's.

Performance IN USE:

So this is where we get down to the nitty gritty. Shoe size and "smooth rings" are fine for ogling in your living room,. but the real issues are how does it perform Optically,. how fast does it focus,. how accurate. And here is where the Sigma EX often starts to fall behind it's nearest "L" competitor...


Viewfinder Image: Winner, Canon.
Fluorite equipped lenses and .5 on the f/stop do have an effect, bringing a slightly brighter view finder. If you've never seen the viewfinder image that a Supertelephoto will provide,. either of these lenses will drop your jaw.

Auto Focus Speed: Canon!
Sigma's HSM (HyperSonic Motor) focus motor is the second fastest AF you can put on your EOS DSLR,... and on the high end Sigma 500mm 4.5EX it is the fastest iteration of the HSM I have encountered,. equaling and besting many Canon USM lenses,. even many L lenses. Likewise,. the USM (UltraSonic Motor) is at it's fastest when installed on Canon's big primes. You simply can not find faster focus than a 1D with a Canon Supertelephoto L.

Auto focus Accuracy: Tie?
In the two years I have had the Sigma 500mm f/4.5 EX I found it's focus accuracy and speed to be as good as, and possibly better than any lens I own, including a number of L lenses. Mated to the 1D MkII it simply never fails at nailing the focus. In my experience with the Canon 500mmL I see no evidence yet that the Canon is any better or worse. Suffice it to say,. if the Canon is better,. it is a minute difference I have not detected.

Focus Tracking: **Canon.
Thus far I have used the Canon to track a moving object only once Vs. two years with the Sigma. To me there was no clear advantage given to the Canon in my simple test with some gulls,. but this is a subject that requires more difficult circumstances and much more testing to see what the Canon can really do. I will update later.
**UPDATE**
Long overdue... the Canon has taken this title. Not surprising to many I'm sure,. but I had to see for myself. A year later I can without question state that the Canon not only has a significant advantage tracking moving subjects when linked to a 1D MkII,. but it seems to posses an almost magical ability to lock onto a birds eyes for focus even when tracking fast moving birds in flight.

Image Stabilization: winner, Canon
I have now used the Canon 500 f/4L IS hand held fairly often! I would never dream of using the Sigma hand held,. and in two years I never once tried it. I shot the Canon hand held on day one out of necessity (it was a timing thing involving a moving vehicle and Cedar Waxwings) and hand held it works well! Also,. I have been using the Canon with just a Mono pod as opposed to always relying on a huge and heavy gimble head tripod affair,. something I would never have tried with the Sigma. The IS works very well in conjunction with a monopod with good steady discipline. The Canon will supply super sharp images used this way. If Sigma ever gets it's "OS" but in gear.. we may have a more even playing field.

Aperture: Winner, Canon
F/4 Vs. f/4.5
Not much else to say. 90% of the time that .5 may not amount to much, but it does bring up the shutter speeds which is always a plus. Plus it effects T-con usage. (see below)

Teleconverter Functionality: Winner, Canon
Canon has this wrapped up in two ways.
1st with the f/4 aperture the Canon can AF with the 1.4X T-con on all bodies, and with the 2X T-con on the "1" bodies.
2nd, the Sigma has a "problem" with it's "1" series compatibility. This leaves the Sigma with the 1.4X t-con unable to AF on the newer 1 series bodies despite the fact that it SHOULD AF at the max aperture of only f/6.3? To date we have no explanation.

Weather Sealing: Winner, Canon
Some Canon L lenses including the 500mm offer weather sealing. I can attest to how well this works in extreme conditions, and I have heard tales of 1D cameras dropped into puddles and surviving. For the full benefit of weather sealing the lens must be mated to a weather sealed camera.. this is the Canon "1" series. The Sigma is very well built,. and like the Canon, I have had my fair share of run ins with it and weather. No it's never been drenched, but some drops never hurt it either.

Image Quality: ?? So damn hard to say!
And this where the Sigma is really earning it's keep. Having had the the Canon for a while now,. I have gotten some STELLAR images with it. But the Sigma has also given me some of the best images I have ever had with all of my DSLRs to date. Literally thousands of superb images with detail and contrast that no other lens I have owned can equal save for this new Canon 500mm and the Canon 200mm f/1.8L.

If the Image quality of a lens that can be had used for $2,200.00 is on par with .. or even hardly noticeably less than the $5,500.00 Canon.. than that is a feat in itself. Interestingly, the other Side by Side review of these lenses that I have read had about the same conclusion re: image quality. Both perform to perfection wide open.

COST NEW: Winner Sigma
Obviously the Sigma costs less,. but significantly so. At the time I wrote this The Canon is $5,500.00 @ B&H and the Sigma is about $3,400.00 (B&H suddenly does not carry it?)

COST USED: Winner Sigma
This is where it starts to get really interesting. As the Canon holds it's value almost completely, but Sigma's drop about 1/4 - 1/3 in value almost the day they are sold. The Sigma in perfect condition can be had for about $2,400.00, where as the Canon's sell regularly for about 10% less than new price,. still at or over $5,000.00

Conclusions:

Well,. as seen in the details above. There is no one lens that wins every category. Even where the pricier Canon excels in many aspects,. some of the finer details of ergonomics and use usability go to the Sigma. Obviously with the dramatic price differential,. a pure value winner has to be the Sigma. For a lot less money... one gets a lens that is very close to the equal of the Canon overall, and better in some ways.

Either of these lenses will go a long way to making any nature photographer's kit better than it is with Zooms or standard telephotos alone. You can't go wrong with either choice.

But if price is no object,. and the extra weight is "doable" then the Canon has to be the overall winner.. the trouble is, the "win" is a remarkably slim margin. This slight lead makes the $Dollar value issue even more compelling.

Cash to burn?
Get the Canon. I also can not stress enough how much more freedom the Canon offers with it's IS. Shooting handheld and with a monopod are a joy to me, as I do not always want to lug a tripod and gimble head. Only with IS do I see this as an option.
As Canon shooters our only IS options are EF lenses and the very few SIGMAs with OS. If they still made this in a Minolta mount the Sony Alpha shooters could use In Body IS and get some help.

Looking for quality the equal of Canon,. but on a budget?
Find a good used Sigma for less than half the price. Enjoy all the benefits of the Canon Supertelephoto and sacrifice only Image Stabilization, AF with T-cons, and weather sealing.

SAMPLE IMAGES:

Sigma 500mm f/4.5 EX HSM
Sample Images Taken with 1D MkII
This lens in combo with the MkII offers literally bulletproff AF. I spent about 7 hours on a sunny Saturday shooting Osprey in flight and diving for fish. I took about 300 photos that day.
NONE of them were out of focus.

http://images.fotopic.net/?id=4506128&outx=600&oq=0&original=1&noresize=1&nostamp=1
http://images.fotopic.net/?id=4506126&outx=575&oq=0&original=1&noresize=1&nostamp=1
http://images.fotopic.net/?id=4506119&outx=600&oq=0&original=1&noresize=1&nostamp=1
http://images.fotopic.net/?id=4506127&outx=600&oq=0&original=1&noresize=1&nostamp=1
http://newfoundland.fotopic.net/p10870977.html
http://newfoundland.fotopic.net/p10870978.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p7195679.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p9178010.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p4683328.html
http://newfoundland.fotopic.net/p10876682.html

Sigma Sample Images Taken with 10D;

http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/photo.php?id=1804021
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/photo.php?id=1393371
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/photo.php?id=1503099
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/photo.php?id=1384300
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/photo.php?id=1393372
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/photo.php?id=1580008
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p2987679.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p2987680.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p2987681.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p2987682.html

Sample Images taken with EF 500mm f/4L IS
Thus far I have only the one small gallery of Cedar Waxwings and a few very nice images of a Cooper's Hawk,..but the combo of Canon SuperTele and 1DMkII seems bulletproof!

http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/c510223.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p14561872.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p14561871.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p14600361.html

**More Images added!**

http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p16038040.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p19763333.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p19763340.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p16038041.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p19763337.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p19763339.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p19911476.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p30124563.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/p30077142.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/c1294880.html
http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/c1294880.html


http://images.fotopic.net/?iid=yhvpf5&outx=600&noresize=1
100% crop of above;
http://images.fotopic.net/?iid=yhvpf7&outx=600&noresize=1

New IMAGES With new EOS 1D Mark III

http://images.fotopic.net/?iid=yowffz&outx=600&noresize=1

http://images.fotopic.net/?iid=yozk37&outx=600&noresize=1


http://images.fotopic.net/?iid=136xfs&outx=600&noresize=1




UPDATE October 2005

Recently I was asked if after spending an entire "season" with the Canon I still found the Sigma's image quality capable of comparing.
Here was my response:



You asked about Image quality comparing the two lenses reviewed....

Well,. before I answer directly,. I'll answer indirectly.
What I have found is that with optics in this caliber, being in the right place and the right time with the right lighting has a lot more to do with the differences I see in my final prints than the lens does.

The next jump in "keepers" has more to do with the lens than with the "image quality " of the lens,. IE, the Canon's IS has been a much larger impact on my photography than I had imagined,. even after owning several IS zooms,. I never really missed not having IS on the Sigma because the Sigma was still that much better than all the zooms. Thus,. the improvements in my final images are due more to the IS than the glass,.

The more direct answer:
The Canon does seem to have better resolving power,. finer details. This is especially noticeable when using the matched T-cons.. I'm amazed at the image quality with the 1.4 and yes,. even the 2X t-con. With the Sigma,. not only did I lose AF,. but I was never really happy with the images taken with the T-cons.

I've had the Canon now for the entire "season" of Wildlife,. and yes I'd say the image quality is slightly better,. but I do not think that alone has been a big enough change from the Sigma to give results that could be noticeably better. (ie prints from the two would look equally superb)
I have images taken with the Sigma that are still just as good, just as sharp, just as detailed as anything taken with the Canon..

The difference is again.. the Canon's ability to help me get those images more often.

I don't think you can go wrong with either choice,.


Consider also,. that if you buy a USED Sigma,. you will not lose any money if you ever decide to "upgrade" to the Canon.
I paid $2,400.00 for My Sigma used from KEH,. in MINT condition,.
I sold it for the exact same price two years later. (mind you I through in both T-cons,. so for the cost of the T-cons I rented this lens for two years ;) )

It's only if you buy the Sigma new where you are pretty much guaranteed to lose money on the resale value.

So the Sigma remains the value leader,. while offering a good taste of the big primes (and allowing you to build those muscles too,. ) to help somone decide before shelling out 2.5 times the price on the Canon. I can't imagine anyone regreting owning it.

[scottbergerphoto]

Excellent review. Unless you must have Canon, the Sigma is clearly a close competitor. I hope they figure out why the 1.4x tcon doesn't AF.

[Tom W]

Nice review - the Sigma does well. Very well.

[cdhender]

Very cool CDS. I don't have the money for or interest in either of these lenses. Nevertheless I found your review very interesting. Funny how the sigma's build quality exceeds Canon's, at least in your opinion. But I guess when you're paying that much for a lense, build quality should be expected. Again, nicely done.

[MDJAK]

Cyber, while that was a very well written review, I'd like the opportunity to write my own. Perhaps if I provide you with my fed ex number, you can send me the Canon first for about six months' worth of testing, at which I'll probably return it to try out the Sigma. I'm even going to brush up on my grammar so as to be sure my review is as well written.:)


That was a pleasure to read. I've quoted my beloved mother once before on this forum and I'll do it again: You should use it in good health.

[CyberDyneSystems]

:lol: Thanks MD,. I'll be sure to send it right over!
The Sigma is now sold,. so you'll have to settle for testing just the Canon :( ;)

...regarding Grammer,. I'm just waiting for Bob Gross to come along and point out what SpellCheck and several edits and proof reads missed :rolleyes:

[ssim]

Very interesting review CDS. I did look at the Sigma before I bought my 500. One of the contributing factors in my decision and one that you mentioned as well was just how well the Canon lenses hold their value. I've had some good success with mine and have run it with the 1.4 and 2.0 teleconverters stacked. Now that you can't handhold. It is not an easy lens to hand hold but certainly is attainable if you can keep that shutter speed up there.

Great review and I didn't even see any typos.

[Rob612]

Thanks for sharing. This was really interesting.

[condyk]

Fab review written with genuine objectivity. Well done, Sir!

Nice to see resale values and overall performance/price value considered. I'd have bought the Sigma for sure.

I'd love to see a 50-500 Bigma, 80-400 OS and 100-400 IS review of the same standard and objectivity... erm, anyone?! For 'everyman' and everywoman' with fewer pennies to spare that would be great.

[roanjohn]

Interesting review!!! The most suprising is the build quality of the sigma.........I thought the Canon would be WAY ahead...........but this is good..........give Canon some competition.

Congrats on the lens.............and beautiful images from both lens.

:-)

Ro1

[CyberDyneSystems]

I'd love to see a 50-500 Bigma, 80-400 OS and 100-400 IS review of the same standard and objectivity... erm, anyone?! For 'everyman' and everywoman' with fewer pennies to spare that would be great.

It doesn't include the 80-400mm,. but there is a discussion here;
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=57174

and these are all linked in the
review" thread;
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34867

Found,. along with everything, in the EOS Sticky.

[MDJAK]

Back on topic: While the Sigma (what's with Bigma, btw) seems to be a great deal, the deal breaker for me is the lack of IS. I don't want to be tethered to a tripod all the time. And I can't even hold my 100mm macro without shaking, fuggedhabout a 500mm without it.

I want the 300 F2.8 though. One day, one day.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Image Stabilization is a BIG deal.. and in this case I have to reiterate it is probably the single largest factor to consider between these lenses. The second being the T-con use.

On the other hand,. a lens this size, focal length, and weight is allways at it's best mounted on a proper tripod. IS or not. Having used the Sigma for two years with the right kind of support (read Wimberly or Manfrotto Gimble style head on heavy tripod,. and NOTHING else) I did not ever find myself missing IS. I got the shots regardless.

IS has been a boon indeed with my other lenses that have it.. but I am simply used to working without it,. and can live without. But anything that will help me get keepers is still a big plus.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Review updated October 20 2005

[RichardtheSane]

Damn you CDS!

I had only just convinced myself I don't need the sigma yet.

Bugger :lol: :lol:

Nice review, missed this first time round - thanks

[CorruptedPhotographer]

what a fantastic thread. Good job CDS.

[Croasdail]

Hey - really nicely done. I think you covered all the bases very objectively. Depending it their use, I have flipflopped between the two brands as well, and each has found their use and applicability. Nicely done.

[MDJAK]

CDS, I never did receive your 500 for testing. You better track that package immediately.

If you never got around to sending it, I forgive you and am still willing to put myself out by testing it for you this winter in the northeast.

Now that's, in the words of Don Corleone, an offer you can't refuse.

I enjoyed reading this review again. Job well done, very well done.

[PetKal]

Cyber, this comes accross as an objective and thourough evaluation, well substantiated with images.
Incidentally, the shot of those two loving ganets is simply superb, any which way one looks at it. Mind you, not that the other images are chopped liver.

[malla1962]

Good review sds,I think I would take the canon as it has IS.:D:D

[Canonswhitelensesrule]

Great review, and images. You forgot one thing in the comparisons though, (unless I missed it), Canon's "WHITE" prime L series telephoto lenses just LOOK BETTER!! :lol

[CyberDyneSystems]

A little subjective, and IMO, I think the all black SIGMA looks better, but people make fun of me for thinking big white lenses are a little garish all the time, I'm used to it now. :lol:

[tekkie]

thanks for posting this ( I think) I just purchased the sigma :)

cant wait to give this lens a go

[CyberDyneSystems]

thanks for posting this ( I think) I just purchased the sigma :)

cant wait to give this lens a go

Any update on the SIGMA?

[Karl Johnston]

Interesting, I was seriously considering the sigma 500 myself.

[CountryBoy]

A little subjective, and IMO, I think the all black SIGMA looks better, but people make fun of me for thinking big white lenses are a little garish all the time, I'm used to it now. :lol:

I feel the same way. Not really fond of the white lens.

[Karl Johnston]

What's the difference between the DG and the NON dg?

[tekkie]

Any update on the SIGMA?

yup its working great, I love it :)

and I just ordered a 500L as well so I will be double checking your work :D lmao

so next weekend I will be giving them a comparison, I like the sigma but my curiosity is killing me :D

[GSH]

What's the difference between the DG and the NON dg?

The letters D and G. :)

And i'm not joking....

[TooManyShots]

Really, there is no battle. 500L hands down the greatest prime for bird photography. Nothing can touch it other than the 600L and the 800L. :) I had the Sigma for a week and tried 2 copies. Not as sharp. Is ok when you don't need to crop. As soon as you need to crop, the softness becomes very apparent. I am sure there are sharp copies but I tried 2 brand new copies and wasn't happy with it. I am sorry but why would I need to go through all the troubles for a $3500+ lens??? For the 500L, all I need is one copy and everything is all good....Love my 500L.:)

[CyberDyneSystems]

Beg to differ,.
Yes the Canon is better, but the SIGMA could at the time I wrote this be had for about $2K used..
Canons' are 2.5 x that cost used..

SIGMA is a very good option for someone looking for that fast prime super tele on a tight budget. I still feel you give up very little optically, and I still feel that Sigma does some things better where ergonomics are concerned.

[TooManyShots]

Beg to differ,.
Yes the Canon is better, but the SIGMA could at the time I wrote this be had for about $2K used..
Canons' are 2.5 x that cost used..

SIGMA is a very good option for someone looking for that fast prime super tele on a tight budget. I still feel you give up very little optically, and I still feel that Sigma does some things better where ergonomics are concerned.

I tried the DG version though.

[CountryBoy]

yup its working great, I love it :)

and I just ordered a 500L as well so I will be double checking your work :D lmao

so next weekend I will be giving them a comparison, I like the sigma but my curiosity is killing me :D


Let us know what you think.

[TooManyShots]

Let us know what you think.


He is curiosity and so he smacked down close to $6000 for a 500L to quench his curiosity???? :) I think he is going to keep it....:)

[CountryBoy]

He is curiosity and so he smacked down close to $6000 for a 500L to quench his curiosity???? :) I think he is going to keep it....:)

Lol, I thought he would ! Just wanted to know how he thought they compared to each other.

[tekkie]

He is curiosity and so he smacked down close to $6000 for a 500L to quench his curiosity???? :) I think he is going to keep it....:)

pretty sure if the L is only minimally better you will see it in the FS section soon ;)

my sigma is quite sharp if I shoot at F4.5 without a TC, and take the same pic at F5.6 without a TC the sharpness is nearly the same

the one thing I am curious about is the speed / sharpness with the TC's I rarely use it without it, with the sigma the 1.4TC works very well, but the 2x not so much , even 2 stacked 1.4s was not so good

[Neilyb]

OK, for what it is worth here is my 2c. I had the Sigma for a couple of months over the winter. I took alot of shots, mostly within 5 or 6 metres. I was happy with IQ, it is pretty sharp. However the HSM (I had newest DG version) was nothing compared to USM (my 100-400 plus 1.4TC was faster and more consistent).
I sold the 500 f4.5 to buy a Canon 300 2.8 IS. They guy who bought the Sigma was not a happy chap. He tested it at a far longer range than I had used it, 20m or so...not very sharp, even f8. He sent it to Sigma who promptly told him they had tested the lens and found no fault at all - this was no warranty call, they could have charged. I have seen his shots, they are beyond terrible so who knows how good the lens really was....for 5m shooting tits and nuthatches...not too bad, longer range, crap and shoddy.

Then came my 300 2.8 IS L. With a 2x TC it gives me 600mm 5.6....and wide open it knocks the spots off the Sigma 500 f4.5 (with or without TC, stopped down or not)....so either it was not good copy or the long tele Ls are just amazing (well, they are). I was so glad I sold the Sigma for a 750€ profit.

Judging shots taken by a friend with his 500 f4 I can honestly say the Sigma is a lower class of lens, cheaper of course but for a reason. Would also seem Sigmas QC is not that great either.

[CyberDyneSystems]

That does s0und like a dud lens,. i had a totally different and much better experience with my SIGMA 500mm.

Yes the Canon 500mm focuses faster, but I've been shooting a 100-400mm for years and there is no way it focuses faster than my SIGMA 500mm did.. If that had been my experience I would not recommend the SIGMA either.. :(

[tekkie]

ok I ended up picking up a canon 500L F4 IS as well as this sigma (non DG)

here are comparison pics between it and the the canon 500 F4L IS (I did quite a few tests in different scenarios, all with the same results) these were shot from a tripod, wide open on both, with the same settings, both are 100% center crops, all shot with 1D MKII the difference to me is virtually nothing, the canon is ever so slightly sharper
http://www.tekkiesphoto.com/photos/550995252_9VqQR-XL.jpg

here it is again with a tamron 1.4tx, again the canon is slightly sharper

http://www.tekkiesphoto.com/photos/551006669_mv95F-XL.jpg

and then with 2 stacked 1.4 tamron TC's, the canon is sharper here but again this is a 100% crop, non pixel peepers wont see the difference imo

http://www.tekkiesphoto.com/photos/551001213_4wiSP-XL.jpg[/IMG]

I agree with what was posted by CDS

I think if I had a camera with microadjustment the sigma would be near equal wide open to the canon

I have had both now for about a month, I really cant decide which of the 2 to keep :(

on one hand I love the sigma its built like a tank, I love the rotation on the lens collar, its lighter / smaller / easier to carry around .... but then the canon has IS (biggest advantage), the AF & IQ is slightly better and it looks meaner :) but really its the lens hood that makes it look bigger, but the sigma lens hood design is way better imo

and then price wise the sigma is the clear winner for sure, I paid more than what I have seen some others go for but I don't regret it because I definitely ended up with a good copy

here are some pics (crops) with the sigma, all taken with the tamron 1.4TC btw

http://www.tekkiesphoto.com/photos/514974601_fUpJw-O.jpg
http://www.tekkiesphoto.com/photos/532851687_MioLD-O.jpg
http://www.tekkiesphoto.com/photos/545583426_kGquP-O.jpg
http://www.tekkiesphoto.com/photos/516114297_Qtbh8-O.jpg
http://www.tekkiesphoto.com/photos/545586170_8Wt6G-O.jpg

really if I could I would keep both but I cant afford that

[Oliviero]

Reviving an old thread. Just curious which one you ended up keeping Tekkie.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Based on his Sig, the Canon. :)

[gary1952]

This is really going to sound strange. But i own the sigma 300mm f2.8 with the matching tc's. I thought it was a bad copy until i did a test with the auto focus and found it front focusing. with a micro adj. I am verrrrrry happy. At 420 it cuts the eyes out of a bird and when the sun is shining 600mm is stunning. With the tc's i usually use a gimble type mount and turn off the stabilization.
I just ordered the 500mm f4.5 sigma and it will be here next week I hope. Instead of using the sigmas on a cannon mount i use it on pentax with the screw focus. I perfer it. I know i am strange but the af is fast and sharp. Also i do not have to worry about the af problems and compadibility when attaching tc's.
Just my finding.
I am very curious to check the 500 on the pentax system. Also i use it on my pentax body because of camera stabilazation. It workes great hand held. I am really hoping it is a winner with the 500...
But i think it will reading this..

I especially want to thank cyberdynesystems. I think you have writen a very good comparison.
Thanks from a newbe with a canon and pentax camera.
Here is a shot using the 300mm at f8 on my tripod and 2.tc. 600mm f8. I nailed every shot and shot probibally 20 shots before the bird disapeared. I was in a blind in the jungle. I saw the nest and decided to wait. I threw up my camo blind( a camo hamok i cut a hole in the middle and throw over me and the camera. It works great by the way.. and very light when back packing.
When i redid this with photoshop and increased saturation the pics are really pleasant. This one is without processing.

http://www.pbase.com/gary1952/image/125854355.jpg

[CyberDyneSystems]

Please please please come back and tell us about it on your Pentax, also post up more stunning samples from the 300mm!

I have long been interested in these lenses on IS equipped bodies,. it seems the natural option for a lower cost birding set up!

[gary1952]

I thought I would share some shots with the pentax k-x with body stabilization and the K-7 with internal stabilization. I perfer the K-x the ISO and IQ are really good. And it is cheappppp. The K-7 is an excellent design but the sensor doesn't have the ISO and IQ qualitys as the cheap k-x.

These are the Sigma 300mm 2.8. All hand held.I am just learning Bird Photography. And i only shoot birds. I only have two lens. 300mm F2.8 and now the 500mm f4.5. in the pentax mount.
http://www.pbase.com/gary1952/image/127053436.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gary1952/image/127046696.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gary1952/image/126392044.jpg

500mm f4.5 hand held.

http://www.pbase.com/gary1952/image/126767675.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gary1952/image/126767671.jpg

This last two pics are with the sigma dedicated 1.4 tc. and the 500
http://www.pbase.com/gary1952/image/126767689.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gary1952/image/126988121.jpg

I own a canon but i am getting older and i wanted very light weight and in body stabilization afords me this option. I love canon and think Pentax has a way to go to catch with auto focus but I am very happy with my set up. Also I do not have to worry about AF problems with the 1.4 and 2.0 tc. I read so many bad things about it with the canon and nikon I was kinda gun shy.

Also had to set the microfocus on the 300mm to +10 to get it to work. I need to send it in and have it adj. I have read almost all the Sigma fast telephotos have the same problem. But i do not know. It may be a camera problem. Or lack of Quality control on the Pentax bodys. One body back focuses and one front focuses. These are cheap bodys and i think it is sloppy QC.

I am the only Pentax shooter in the group. I catch hell about it. :)

Also i think the OP has a good point in. If you buy these two lens used you can really have an excellent outfit for birding with a very small outlay. I did not go this route because I wanted to make sure the product produced at the level i was interested in. Now i wish i had bought used... oh well.

Thanks again for the great thread. I was on the fence about the Sigma 500mm f4.5. I have owned it for about a month now i think. And i am blown away with the image quality.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Nice! Thanks for posting.

[SiaoP]

This thread has been very helpful. The Sigma looks very good but I would still go for the Canon for its IS.

[gary1952]

Shot these today. with the 1.4 t.c.
Sigma 500mm

http://www.pbase.com/gary1952/image/127951897.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gary1952/image/127951899.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gary1952/image/127951895.jpg

[HYBEagle]

YOu mentioned that "The Canon is $5,500.00 @ B&H", when the heck was that ?


Most of the ebay sellers are taging this lens well over 8k !!!!

[phreeky]

YOu mentioned that "The Canon is $5,500.00 @ B&H", when the heck was that ?


Most of the ebay sellers are taging this lens well over 8k !!!!

Have you looked at the dates of the posts in this thread? It was started in '05.

FYI there is supply problems, plus the US dollar is at laughable levels at the moment, plus I'm sure other stuff has happened over 6 years that would impact on price.

[Hor Kee]

Lovely shots, Gary. I'm curious whether you leave in-body stabilization on when using your Pentax on a tripod. If you do, is there any noticeable difference in IQ when compared to those occassions when you have left it off? I'm seriously considering the Sigma as a replacement for my 400mm F5.6L sometime in the not-too-near future when finances permit. I believe I can live without IS for now too.