Sigma 500 f4.5 question

has anyone got this lens ? is it good? and a few sample pic's taken by it as im thinking about getting one if things go to plan.
Thanks
Rob.

I guess theres a HSM and a non HSM version of the lens:

Sigma 500 f4.5 EX APO HSM

Yes its the hsm one i would get, thoes shots are really good and show just what can be done with this lens in the right hands .
many thanks.
Rob

Do you reckon? I like the big Sigma's usually but never fancied this fella. Just lacks a bit of pop and contrast for me from the shots I've seen. Those shots referenced look like a sharpness fiend has been let loose on them

CDS had this lens for some time, he captured some stellar shots with it

Hopefully he will drop by with a few examples...

the shots change so i think you may be looking at diffrent ones to the ones i looked at but over all there,s some good shots taken with it agree some are over done but i do that to sometimes
Rob.

gyrob wrote:
the shots change so i think you may be looking at diffrent ones to the ones i looked at but over all there,s some good shots taken with it agree some are over done but i do that to sometimes
Rob.

Ok, fair do's! I looked at it semi-seriously around 6 months ago and decided against but that means absolutely nothing One thing that's clear looking at the nature and birdy section is how important the shooter is. I guy like you should get superb shots with our old friend the Bigma. Save a bit of cash Hell, Mr Dancad there even gets great shots with the 70-300 APO!

As an alternative can I suggest a used Canon EF 500/4.5? A little lighter, about same length, great quality. They have been going for $3500+/- on eBay lately. I like mine and with a Tamron SP 1.4x (tape on 3 pins) I have smooth, accurate AF.

Go search through the posts by "Cadwell"

IIRC he has a Sigma 500 f4.5 and has posted some stunning shots from it.

This lens is the best lens Sigma makes IMHO.

It easily compares with the Canon big primes,. and if you find one used you save boatloads of cash. (around $2,500.00 used in mint condition)

If you think the Sigma zooms are acceptable,. this thing will blow you away. It is lightyears ahead of all the zooms (except for the 120-300mm and the 300-800mm which are remarkably prime like.)

Make SURE you get the "EX" lens,. the older one does not come close to comparing (i've owned both) They look very different so it should not be hard to tell. The "EX" Only comes in "HSM" as well,. and the HSM is a must have for this beauty.

As Gasrocks mentions,. you can also find the discontinued Canon 500mm f/4.5L .. but expect to spend about $1K more for a used one over a used Sigma.

Read this;
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=69791

Review and lots of links to images.

Thanks for all replys, i did think about the canon 500f4.5 but as its an older lens it could be hard to get fixed if anything went wrong i would rather go for new sigma hopefull i will get one for the beging of summer.
Rob.

Must admit its a lens i've looked at myself. I've got the 300 2.8 and the quality, even with the 2x EX is quite superb. If the 500 is even better it must be a real keeper.

Sprout,. I've never had oportunity to try the 300mm Sigma,. though I considered it vey seriously. From all I have heard and seen it is the most under appreciated lens Sigma makes,. especially having been eclipsed by it's newer and more unique zoom relative.

I got a very good copy of these fantastic glass for sale. See the gull i have taken with it on http://www.pixelshoote​r.dk

Tommy

I managed to score a pristine, virtually new one for just £730; genuinely looked unused. The equivalent Canon pre-IS and a bit old and tatty goes for THREE times that amount here and would have been fundamentally out of reach as an amateur. Build is superb as well.
What amazes me is that it remains very sharp even with the 2x EX added. I want to pick up the 1.4x to try as well.

Unfortunately, the damn thing is 4000 miles away at the moment along with most of my equipment.

Really wish Sigma would invest a little more in spreading OS around its range of long telephotos though. Don't really know why they haven't.