Sigma 600mm f8 Mirror Lens

[digitalfilm]

I fancy playing around with a Sigma 600mm f8 mirror lens.

I mostly take photos of birds and wildlife, will it be a useful
addition or will I be wasting my money?, comments welcomed!

[CyberDyneSystems]

It's so cheap it's hard to call it wasting money... (compared to a refracting lens in that focal range)

But.. I do not think it can be too usefull for bird photography.. or of anything moving.

Unlike most Telephoto Sigma's... no one seems to think this one is any better than the others. So it may make more sense from a "disposable lens experiment" point of view to pick up one of the no -name 500mm reflectors instead.

In the end.. there all pretty much = junk though.

[Andy_T]

The Russian 500 mm mirror lenses (e.g. Rubinar) are even supposed to be quite decent.
Look here! (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=71444&highlight=rubinar)

Best regards,
Andy

[weemannie]

I had one of the Sigmas many years ago and found it too soft for bird photography. Also, an inherent problem with mirror lenses is the 'doughnut' effect, where rings appear in the background. I found this very distracting.

[ron chappel]

The sigma 600mm is definitely better than the cheapo $100-brand-new-on-epay mirrors .
Those cheapies are barely useable but the sigma might be quite ok.Not great but ok

[joeseph]

I just got rid of mine - I rarely used it. It was a FD mount that I got way back when I had an AE-1 and I had since got an EOS converter on it.
To put it in perspective, using a 75-300 with a 2x TC produced better pictures....
(and that is pretty average)

[MrChad]

Again, I said this in another post, if the lens was AF like the Minolta model it would be a great lens for the price.

[inQuanahsfootsteps]

I can't take anymore so I finally have to weigh in.The Sigma 600mm mirror lens is in my opinion about the finest produced. Can we talk? In todays huge money cameras,lenses, and software programs if you can't get a stunning photo out this lens it isn't the equipments fault. Truthfully, what's the first thing 99% of photographers do when they finish shooting-they head straight to ps or phase one and start tweaking. Regardless of what lens they use. Canon makes some fine lenses but unfortunately they want you to pay thru the nose for them. And yes I've been caught up in that name trap too-but I have one lone Canon lens now having found lenses that rival or exceed my other Canon lenses-all made by Sigma and alot easier on the pocket book.
Do you shoot in RAW? Do you own a tripod? If so no problem,get this lens and enjoy it. I started out in 35mm film-went to medium format and now all Digital. A long and eventful journey and found out along the way that it's better to be concerned about the images you produce than the image you project. Let the quality of your work and devotion speak for you rather than the name on your lens or it's designation.
My clients neither care nor know what lenses or equipment I use-they only care about what they see.
And yes I am a Canon fan who presently owns three canon cameras and an array of lens and gear-you know how that goes.

[gasrocks]

Yes, the SIgma 600 mirror is one of the better mirrors.

[inQuanahsfootsteps]

Thanks for getting my back gasrocks-you are an obvious scholar of repute.

[bacchanal]

not terrible...
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/600_8_mirror