SIGMA announces the 500mm F5.6 DG DN OS | Sports, but not for RF…… yet

[Canon Rumors Guy]

The SIGMA 500mm F5.6 DG DN OS | Sports is an ultra-telephoto prime lens exclusively for mirrorless cameras that features a 500mm focal length with outstanding image quality in a remarkably compact and lightweight body. By incorporating multiple large-diameter, exclusive low-dispersion glass elements that are challenging to process, SIGMA succeeded in significantly downsizing the lens

See full article...

 

[koenkooi]

That looks like a very nice and lightweight lens, like the Nikon 500PF. It sadly only does 1:6 magnification, so it won't be on my list, the 1:3 magnification for the RF100-500L still hasn't been beaten.

 

[neuroanatomist]

…the 1:3 magnification for the RF100-500L still hasn't been beaten.

But how is f/7.1 even usable compared to f/5.6?

 

[AlanF]

It looks a very nice lens, and parallels in specifications the Nikon 500mm f/5.6 DO. However, I've been though this before: I found the versatility of a RF 100-500mm f/7.1, including close focussing, so much more useful than a 500/5.6 prime, the actual sharpness not being much less in practice. For those who want a light weight prime, great, and it's a pity they can't have one. Not for me any more, though.

 

[koenkooi]

But how is f/7.1 even usable compared to f/5.6?

Panasonic announced a f/7.1 zoom lens this week, so that aperture must have something going for it

 

[Berowne]

After the Sony 300/2.8 another small, lightweight, fast and not so expensive Super-Tele Primelens which fulfills (nearly) all whishes, but not from Canon.

 

[mimbu]

Watched the Sigma announcement video. Amazing lens! They somehow managed to make a lens smaller and lighter than the already tiny Nikon 500/5.6 PF, but without having to use PF or DO type elements. The initial reviews are extremely positive.

I hope Sigma releases a few more lenses using this same technology.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

That looks like a very nice and lightweight lens, like the Nikon 500PF. It sadly only does 1:6 magnification, so it won't be on my list, the 1:3 magnification for the RF100-500L still hasn't been beaten.

I can't believe that Sigma made a lens so small.
Bigma is DOOMED!

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Watched the Sigma announcement video. Amazing lens! They somehow managed to make a lens smaller and lighter than the already tiny Nikon 500/5.6 PF, but without having to use PF or DO type elements. The initial reviews are extremely positive.

I hope Sigma releases a few more lenses using this same technology.

Sigma claims that they managed to get it so small by using low dispersion elements.
I believe that is also the secret to the Nikon 400 f/4.5.
I have no idea how Sony got their 300 f/2.8 so small.
Sony does not get super technical about lenses.

 

[juststeve]

I own both the 100-500 and the 500/4 L ii. I think both lenses are magnificent with a few quibbles. With the 100-500 it is the POS tripod ring which a month ago let go over frozen asphalt and which pissed me off enough with Canon to start looking seriously at Nikon Z8's and 600/4 TC's and S100-400's. My 500 is extremely sharp and light enough but could be balanced better. The Nikon 600 comes pretty close in size and weight and sure is balanced better.

Then Sigma announces a 500/5.6 which sounds really sweet. Barely larger than the 100-500 (half inch wider and Inch longer) and the same weight and promising to be near to or as sharp as my two lenses, it is very tempting if only it were available for a reputable camera company with decent service and support. Above all it has a good looking tripod ring, removable to exploit the compact size and with an Arca mount cut, but also it looks solid and reliable. Something Canon did not do with the 100-500.

 

[TonyG]

the 1:3 magnification for the RF100-500L still hasn't been beaten.

Umm.....
The old Sony 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 GM from 2017 has 0.35x (1:2.9).....
The Sigma 150-600 f/5-6.3 DG DN has 0.34x
The Sigma 60-600 f/4.5-6.3 DG DN has 0.42x
The Tamron 150-500 f/5-6.7 Di iii has 0.32x
The Nikon Z 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 has 0.38x
Lots of options of 1:3 or better lenses in that focal range #Just sayin

 

[AlanF]

Umm.....
The old Sony 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 GM from 2017 has 0.35x (1:2.9).....
The Sigma 150-600 f/5-6.3 DG DN has 0.34x
The Sigma 60-600 f/4.5-6.3 DG DN has 0.42x
The Tamron 150-500 f/5-6.7 Di iii has 0.32x
The Nikon Z 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 has 0.38x
Lots of options of 1:3 or better lenses in that focal range #Just sayin

The RF 100-400 has 0.41x.

 

[TonyG]

The RF 100-400 has 0.41x.

The Sony 70-200 has 0.5x. What’s your point.

 

[AlanF]

False, it is 0.33x . 1 / 3 = 0.33

RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM | RF Lens

The RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM super telephoto zoom lens delivers a superb combination of cutting-edge performance, compact construction and brilliant resolving power specifically designed for the EOS R system.

canon.ca

Max magnification at 500 is 0.33

Math is math

False - read your post. You have quoted my 0.41x Magnification for the RF 100-400mm, and then pasted in the magnification for the RF 100-500mm. The 100-400 has 0.41x.

400 ≠ 500

Math is Math

Edit: @TonyG has now deleted the post to which I replied in this post. My post had copied here the end of his post, but missed out his quote of mine. His post began with my post that the Magnification of the RF 100-400 is 0.41x and claimed it was false. It is bad when people delete posts after they have been rebutted.

 

[AlanF]

The Sony 70-200 has 0.5x. What’s your point.

I was just adding another example of magnification greater than 0.3.

 

[koenkooi]

Umm.....
The old Sony 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 GM from 2017 has 0.35x (1:2.9).....
The Sigma 150-600 f/5-6.3 DG DN has 0.34x
The Sigma 60-600 f/4.5-6.3 DG DN has 0.42x
The Tamron 150-500 f/5-6.7 Di iii has 0.32x
The Nikon Z 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 has 0.38x
Lots of options of 1:3 or better lenses in that focal range #Just sayin

I was unclear in what I wrote, but I mean "unbeaten by primes". As you and @AlanF pointed out, there are zooms in that range with better magnification. Including the RF100-400, which I actually own myself

 

[neuroanatomist]

The Sony 70-200 has 0.5x. What’s your point.

The Canon 100/2.8 has 1.4x. What’s yours?

 

[TonyG]

The Canon 100/2.8 has 1.4x. What’s yours?

That one will probably take a while to be beaten
Any closer and you might scratch the glass lol

 

[TonyG]

False - read your post. You have quoted my 0.41x Magnification for the RF 100-400mm, and then pasted in the magnification for the RF 100-500mm. The 100-400 has 0.41x.

400 ≠ 500

Math is Math

Edit: @TonyG has now deleted the post to which I replied in this post. My post had copied here the end of his post, but missed out his quote of mine. His post began with my post that the Magnification of the RF 100-400 is 0.41x and claimed it was false. It is bad when people delete posts after they have been rebutted.

My bad, I deleted the post as soon as I hit post reply and noticed you said the 100-400. You must have replied within the minute it took for me to hit delete while I then replied with the 70-200 G comment. As you can see the 70-200 reply is there before you replied to the original post. Sorry for any confusion, you must have hit reply within that minute it was there.

 

[neuroanatomist]

That one will probably take a while to be beaten
Any closer and you might scratch the glass lol

Working distance is a key point!