500mm f/5.6 IS

On another forum someone mentioned wanting a 500mm at f/5.6 from Canon.

I would very much favor one over a 400mm at f/5.6 as it is a more focal length where I live.

Now if a 500mm f/5.6 came out for between $4,000-5,000 would you buy one?

This theoretical lens would have a weight 1.59-1.94kg and a dimension of around 10.16cm by 34.03cm.

I voted for no, cost too much.


However I would like to see one, but hope to see this lens @ $3.5K max, maybe less.

It should be less $$ than a 300mm f/2.8 (which is cost weight wise about the same as a 600mm f/5.6)

I realize that the VII 300mm f/2.8L IS is now a ridiculous price of $6,500.00, but just back ten years ago the version I IS was about $3,700.00

Is my price point realistic? Maybe not.

dolina wrote in post #17274578
On another forum someone mentioned wanting a 500mm at f/5.6 from Canon.

I would very much favor one over a 400mm at f/5.6 as it is a more focal length where I live.

Now if a 500mm f/5.6 came out for between $4,000-5,000 would you buy one?

This theoretical lens would have a weight 1.59-1.94kg and a dimension of around 10.16cm by 34.03cm.

A lens resembling what you want already exists. It's a Sigma 500mm unit at f/4.5, and its price falls in the range you specified.

I owned the SIGMA 500mm for some time before I got my hands on a deal on the Canon 500mm IS (v 1)
It was the first super telephoto prime I ever shot with and it is an excellent lens.
It is a good deal heavier than a new f/5.6 would be, and it still lacks IS/OS (Hello Sigma, get with the program!)

Optically it is top shelf. It's inability to work with T-cons even when it should, and lack of IS (age it's overall age of design) makes it not much of a c=ontender today.

but at one point, this in a Minolta mount used, on a Sony A series got you an Image stabilized 500mm for about $2K with optics comparable to Canon and Nikon 500mm

With the 7D2 now AF'ing with TC's, longer focal lengths are now available to the masses without having to spend the price of a car.

Pentax makes one, just a point of reference. Well actually it's a 560mm f5.6

http://www.us.ricoh-imaging.com …PENTAX_DA_560mm​_F5.6ED_AW

$7000 new.

Not to mention several new 150-600mm zooms that have good image quality.

Ian, the masses can get it even cheaper with the SX60. If I am not mistake it weighs the same as a TC and cost almost as much.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17276385
I owned the SIGMA 500mm for some time before I got my hands on a deal on the Canon 500mm IS (v 1)
It was the first super telephoto prime I ever shot with and it is an excellent lens.
It is a good deal heavier than a new f/5.6 would be, and it still lacks IS/OS (Hello Sigma, get with the program!)

When was the last time Sigma updated any of their tele primes?

Canon will not make one, as much as i would like to see one. Making both a f4 and f5.6 lens double manufacturing costs, it would destroy sales of the 500 f4 me thinks.

DC Fan wrote in post #17275875
A lens resembling what you want already exists. It's a Sigma 500mm unit at f/4.5, and its price falls in the range you specified.

I owned one too BUT like CDS says it did not play with TCs, full stop, even on a 1DSII. You could tape the pins, but results varied with light. The bare lens too gave differing results. Nice sunny day, great, super sharp. Diffused day, milky pictures, not quite sharp, not quite soft. Weird.
Sigma never updated the firmware, I am sure they could have to make it at least work with a 1.4TC. But no. I was never so happy as when i got my 500 f4 IS, seriously, twice the price (used) but twice the lens (always sharp, even with a TC... and you can use a TC ).

Far too expensive - and even moreso if the Sigma 150-600 turns out to be sharp.

A 300-800 f/5.6L IS with inbuilt 1.4x TC would be really nice, though. Basically an updated Sigmonster.

Shadowblade wrote in post #17278900
Far too expensive - and even moreso if the Sigma 150-600 turns out to be sharp.

A 300-800 f/5.6L IS with inbuilt 1.4x TC would be really nice, though. Basically an updated Sigmonster.

But it would cost $20,000

Neilyb wrote in post #17278960
But it would cost $20,000

OK, make it Sport and OS instead of L and IS and halve the price.

Maybe, original is pretty pricey...

Neilyb wrote in post #17279846
Maybe, original is pretty pricey...

The prices have skyrocketed from launch. Every time they changed the coating formula they added another 2K or so.

Like I said, I never should have sold mine. I could triple my money now.