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

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.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #8008116
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.

tekkie wrote in post #8007276
yup its working great, I love it

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

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

Let us know what you think.

CountryBoy wrote in post #8008487
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....

TooManyShots wrote in post #8008537
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.

TooManyShots wrote in post #8008537
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

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.

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..

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

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

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

Based on his Sig, the Canon.

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 response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

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!

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 response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

Nice! Thanks for posting.