Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 16 Mar 2017 (Thursday) 11:13
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 500mm f4 vs Sigma 500mm f4

 
Michael ­ Frymus
Member
Avatar
67 posts
Likes: 51
Joined Feb 2017
     
Mar 16, 2017 11:13 |  #1

I've searched but found nothing comparing these two lenses.

There has been some reviews on the sigma f4.5 vs the canon. But then again, I've only found 3.. But nothing on the f4.

Its a cheaper alternative to the canon. So I'm wondering its worth considering.


Michael Frymus
Travel Photographer || Filmmaker || Vlogger
Instagram: https://www.instagram.​com/michaelfrymus (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
05Xrunner
Goldmember, Flipflopper.
Avatar
5,606 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Likes: 387
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Pittsburgh PA
     
Mar 16, 2017 11:25 |  #2

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0 (external link)

dont know if you saw this review
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …G-OS-HSM-Sports-Lens.aspx (external link)


My gear
Canon 7D Mark II, Canon 35 f2 IS, Sigma 50 1.4 EX, Canon 100mm f2, Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2, Sigma 150-600 C, Shanny SN600C flash, Tascam DR-05 v2
Fuji X-T1, Fuji X-T2, Fuji 18-55 2.8-4 OIS, Fuji 35 f2, Fuji 55-200 3.5-4.8 OIS
Sony RX100 II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ShadowHillsPhoto
Senior Member
Avatar
503 posts
Gallery: 156 photos
Likes: 1082
Joined Aug 2015
Location: Schoharie, NY
     
Mar 16, 2017 11:53 |  #3

I haven't seen a head to head with the Canon, but Brad Hill did a very thorough comparison against the Nikon.

http://www.naturalart.​ca/voice/blog.html (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scrumhalf
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,190 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 3249
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Portland OR USA
Post edited over 1 year ago by Scrumhalf.
     
Mar 16, 2017 12:08 |  #4

The Canon 500/4 II and the 600/4 II are the finest long lenses made today. You really cannot do any better.

The Sigma is a step below that quality. It is cheaper. You have to decide whether the compromises are acceptable.


Sam
5D4 | 6D | 7D2 (2 bodies) | Reasonably good glass
Gear List

flickr (external link)
If I don't get the shots I want with the gear I have, the only optics I need to examine is the mirror on the bathroom wall. The root cause will be there.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ShadowHillsPhoto
Senior Member
Avatar
503 posts
Gallery: 156 photos
Likes: 1082
Joined Aug 2015
Location: Schoharie, NY
     
Mar 16, 2017 12:20 |  #5

Scrumhalf wrote in post #18302535 (external link)
The Canon 500/4 II and the 600/4 II are the finest long lenses made today. You really cannot do any better.

The Sigma is a step below that quality. It is cheaper. You have to decide whether the compromises are acceptable.

Based on the available evidence I'm not so sure that's the case. Do you have hands on experience with the Sigma? I've owned the 500mm f4 IS and currently own the 600mm f4 IS II, but if I was considering a new 500mm I think the Sigma would be in very strong contention. I don't think it is "better" than the Canon, but aside from being a bit heavier it may very well be it's equal (and at a pretty significant cost savings).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scrumhalf
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,190 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 3249
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Portland OR USA
Post edited over 1 year ago by Scrumhalf.
     
Mar 16, 2017 12:30 as a reply to  @ ShadowHillsPhoto's post |  #6

No, I don't have hands on experience, but the couple of reviews I have read indicated that build quality was equivalent but IQ and focusing were close and maybe a notch below, perhaps similar to 100-400 II vs. 150-600, but close enough to make it worth considering for most people who don't want to spend the 2 grand of whatever extra for the Canon.


Sam
5D4 | 6D | 7D2 (2 bodies) | Reasonably good glass
Gear List

flickr (external link)
If I don't get the shots I want with the gear I have, the only optics I need to examine is the mirror on the bathroom wall. The root cause will be there.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ShadowHillsPhoto
Senior Member
Avatar
503 posts
Gallery: 156 photos
Likes: 1082
Joined Aug 2015
Location: Schoharie, NY
     
Mar 16, 2017 12:44 |  #7

Do you happen to have links to the comparisons vs the Canon? All I've seen so far is the comparison to the Nikon that I linked above, and the Sigma has looked really good based on that. I'd really like to read a direct comparison to the Canon though. I'm not in the market for a 500mm but I'd be happy to see the Sigma do really well and perhaps keep some pressure on Canon to keep their lenses priced competitively.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scrumhalf
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,190 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 3249
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Portland OR USA
     
Mar 16, 2017 12:49 |  #8

I'll try to find links later today and post them. It's been a while since I read them.


Sam
5D4 | 6D | 7D2 (2 bodies) | Reasonably good glass
Gear List

flickr (external link)
If I don't get the shots I want with the gear I have, the only optics I need to examine is the mirror on the bathroom wall. The root cause will be there.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ShadowHillsPhoto
Senior Member
Avatar
503 posts
Gallery: 156 photos
Likes: 1082
Joined Aug 2015
Location: Schoharie, NY
     
Mar 16, 2017 13:04 |  #9

Thanks. Like I said, it's not like I'm in the market but I have been trying to follow along with the Sigma out of general interest/curiosity.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scrumhalf
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,190 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 3249
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Portland OR USA
     
Mar 16, 2017 13:13 |  #10

They're definitely doing a great job! My comments should in no way be interpreted as a knock on Sigma. I think they are keeping the big boys honest and throwing in a bunch of innovative ideas too. More power to them!


Sam
5D4 | 6D | 7D2 (2 bodies) | Reasonably good glass
Gear List

flickr (external link)
If I don't get the shots I want with the gear I have, the only optics I need to examine is the mirror on the bathroom wall. The root cause will be there.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2loose
Goldmember
Avatar
1,155 posts
Gallery: 185 photos
Likes: 991
Joined Apr 2011
Location: I Heart NY & T-Dot
     
Mar 16, 2017 14:42 |  #11

ShadowHillsPhoto wrote in post #18302568 (external link)
Thanks. Like I said, it's not like I'm in the market but I have been trying to follow along with the Sigma out of general interest/curiosity.

Not a comparison, but it's a good review.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …G-OS-HSM-Sports-Lens.aspx (external link)


Body:Canon EOS-5D Mark IV, Sony A7II
Lenses: Canon EF 85mm f1.2L II, Canon 24mm TS-E f3.5L II, Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8L II, Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS II, Canon TC 1.4X III, Sony FE 24-70mm F4, Sony FE 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G OSS

flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scrumhalf
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,190 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 3249
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Portland OR USA
     
Mar 16, 2017 19:00 |  #12

ShadowHillsPhoto wrote in post #18302556 (external link)
Do you happen to have links to the comparisons vs the Canon? All I've seen so far is the comparison to the Nikon that I linked above, and the Sigma has looked really good based on that. I'd really like to read a direct comparison to the Canon though. I'm not in the market for a 500mm but I'd be happy to see the Sigma do really well and perhaps keep some pressure on Canon to keep their lenses priced competitively.

I was mistaken. I did not read a direct comparison review of Canon 500/4 II vs. Sigma 500/4. Upon going through all the old posts and web articles, I think I arrived at my conclusion based on the following data points:

1. New Sigma appears to be comparable to the Nikon 500/4 VR, which in turn is comparable to Canon equivalent. So, if Canon has an IQ advantage, it is probably small.
2. Sigma has an issue with best focus point varying with aperture based on the digital picture review This is a problem. Maybe if you are shooting wide open all the time, it's ok but if this shifts when stopped down, it's highly undesirablle.
3. It is heavier than the 500/4 II.

So, I concluded that the Canon is overall a better lens than the Sigma. Is it 3K better? Only the buyer can say, but my 500/4 has performed brilliantly for me, everything that I would expect a top-of-the-line white prime to do.


Sam
5D4 | 6D | 7D2 (2 bodies) | Reasonably good glass
Gear List

flickr (external link)
If I don't get the shots I want with the gear I have, the only optics I need to examine is the mirror on the bathroom wall. The root cause will be there.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DJHaze596
Goldmember
Avatar
1,398 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 658
Joined May 2012
Location: Florida
Post edited over 1 year ago by DJHaze596.
     
Mar 17, 2017 17:52 |  #13

I assume the op is talking about version 1 500 f4 not version 2 because the price gap would be a deal breaker. You can find a clean 400 f2.8 IS USM V1 or 500 f4 IS USM V1 for around $4,000-$5,000 and I was in the same situation. I chose the 400 f2.8 IS V1 base on sharpness and the ability to have f2.8 when needed. Also with a 1.4x TC, it's still sharper than the 500mm f4 V1. If you can deal with the extra weight of the 400 f2.8 than go for that instead. I handhold it all day, people think im crazy :-)

Edit: 500 f4 II is sharper but were talking $2300 difference in price. I don't see that difference base on sharpness or build quality. Maybe AF as Sigmas are known to be a bit iffy.

See for yourself:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0 (external link)


Canon C200 | Canon 5D Mark IV | 16-35 f4L IS USM | 24-105mm f4L
50mm STM | 70-200mm f2.8L II | 100-400mmL II | 400mm f2.8L IS USM
Previously Owned: 1DX Mark II | Canon 5D Mark IV | 7D Mark II | 1D Mark IV

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
48,305 posts
Gallery: 79 photos
Likes: 4429
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
Post edited over 1 year ago by CyberDyneSystems. (5 edits in all)
     
Mar 17, 2017 18:18 |  #14

I am confident this is one of, if not the best lens SIGMA has ever fielded, but it's niche is questionable now. The Canon Version II IS lenses = very low used prices for the version 1.

With the used price of the version 1 Canon, I would be amazed at anyone looking to save some $$ Vs. the newer Canon opting to spend $2000.00 more on the new SIGMA vs. a used MkI. ( and this comes from someone that was hoping SIGMA would launch an upgrade from the old f/4.5 going all the way back to 2005.)

Some high points, Brad prefers it to the Nikon, this is very impressive.
Despite the Canon having a closer MFD rating, if you manually focus, the SIGMA allows closer focus! That can truly be a big deal for some.

EDIT: This is incorrect, I was reading the Nikon 500mm specs when I typed this. My mistake. A big minus for the SIGMA IMHO - It weighs as much (MORE!) than the older Canon Version 1!!
The only reason I upgraded to the Version II was weight. Seriously.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Michael ­ Frymus
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
67 posts
Likes: 51
Joined Feb 2017
Post edited over 1 year ago by Michael Frymus.
     
Mar 17, 2017 18:51 as a reply to  @ DJHaze596's post |  #15

I was referring to the newer mk.ii models, I suppose.
Didnt even consider the mk.i version.
Dont know anything about it, even price.


Michael Frymus
Travel Photographer || Filmmaker || Vlogger
Instagram: https://www.instagram.​com/michaelfrymus (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

17,264 views & 40 likes for this thread
Canon 500mm f4 vs Sigma 500mm f4
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is 4bosing
875 guests, 437 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.