Lenstip review of Sigma 500mm sport lens

[Chaitanya]

https://www.lenstip.com/510.11-Lens_review-Sigma_S_500_mm_f_4_DG_OS_HSM_Summary.html

 

[SecureGSM]

Thanks for the heads up.

Cons: noticeable vignetting of -1.2EV in extreme FF corners wide open at F4.0

they gotta be kidding. That's nothing to worry about. I suppose, they have to find some cons to report right?

Good review though.

 

[BeenThere]

https://www.lenstip.com/510.11-Lens_review-Sigma_S_500_mm_f_4_DG_OS_HSM_Summary.html

Looks like a great value compared to the Canon.

 

[Jopa]

https://www.lenstip.com/510.3-Lens_review-Sigma_S_500_mm_f_4_DG_OS_HSM_Build_quality_and_image_stabilization.html

the Sigma strap looks and performs like a cheap fake

That's a deal breaker for me. Pass.

;D

 

[SecureGSM]

I can get one brand new from the authorised distributor at around A$5,500 in Melbourne
I am not into long lenses at the mo but I would fully expect the possibility to purchase a sligltly used one at A$4,000 or better price mark given one is not in a hurry and can shop around.

https://www.lenstip.com/510.11-Lens_review-Sigma_S_500_mm_f_4_DG_OS_HSM_Summary.html

Looks like a great value compared to the Canon.

 

[AlanF]

As seems usual for Sigma telephotos, it has relatively poor image stabilization. It seems virtually identical to that of the el cheapo Sigma 150-600mm C, being 3 ev or less for most of its working range:

https://www.lenstip.com/510.3-Lens_review-Sigma_S_500_mm_f_4_DG_OS_HSM_Build_quality_and_image_stabilization.html

“The maximum distance between both curves reaches 3.5 EV and such is, in our opinion, the stabilization unit efficiency. It is a result a bit lower than the declared one but still good enough, allowing you to work with comfort at such long focal lengths.”


https://www.lenstip.com/434.3-Lens_review-Sigma_C_150-600_mm_f_5-6.3_DG_OS_HSM_Build_quality_and_image_stabilization.html

“It is clear that the maximum distance between both curves amounts to 3.0-3.3 EV and such is, in our opinion, the tested lens’s stabilization system efficiency. It is a good result but hardly a record-breaking one.”

 

[edoorn]

those samples with the converter don't look too good to be honest

If you check the digital picture review tool, you can also see the Canon 500 II is doing a better job with the converter: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=745&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=1&LensComp=1086&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=0

If you'd only use this lens without a converter, I'm sure you won't notice much difference in sharpness (real life focus is a different thing; don't read too much about that in the test), but if you shoot converters, which probably a lot of 500 shooters would do, then I'm not sure if this is the one (despite the price difference)