Sigma 500mm 7.2 question

<p>I have a question regarding the old Sigma 500mm 7.2. I believe there is some kind on incompatability issue when being used on a Canon DSLR. Then I also read that the lens could be used but only at 7.2. Is it possible to use this lens manually? Also, would it be preferable to use a Nikon or Olympus mount with an adapter on a Canon DSLR? Just want to see if there's a way for a way to use this lens on a 5D where you're not stuck at 7.2.</p>

<p>If you can find it in a version with a manual aperture ring that can be adapted to EOS, that should give you the ability to control aperture. However it won't autofocus. Of course there's no guarantee that even a Canon EOS AF version will AF on a modern DSLR either.</p>

<p>So if you don't mind manual focus and manual aperture control the easiest route might be a Nikon mount and an EOS adapter. Not sure it's worth the trouble though. There's nothing very special about the lens - other than that fact that it may be the cheapest 500mm refractive optics lens that's out there (apart from the "no-name" brands). In its day it wasn't regarded as being particularly good.</p>

There are probably two issues - assuming you are looking at the AF version.

 

First the lens is F7.2 so it should not AF although some of these big Sigma lenses report F5.6 so the camera will attempt

AF (note 1 series bodies will AF down to F8)

 

Second I think this lens is from the period where Sigma had an issue with Canon AF. In essence Sigma reverse

engineered the EOS mount and when Canon went from film to digital the lens would no longer AF - indeed you got error

99. Sigma did re-chip a limited number of lenses but many were not done. kEH will indicate this by labelling a lens FO

(film only) but others do not always do so. If you have a lens that was not re-chipped then you have an issue. On most

EOS bodies you can shoot stopped down and get the shutter to release but only with the lens wide open (this is the case

with a 14 f3.5 I have that was not re-chipped). Alternatively if you put is on a film body, set the aperture than switch

bodies and shoot stopped down on both it will retain the aperture set on the film body for one shot - not really a practical

proposition!

 

In terms of. Using an adapter in general this will just make matters worse. Some may allow you to shoot in manual focus

but give AF confirmation.

<p>Bob, thanks for the response. I guess it's reputation for not being that good explains why it's so inexpensive. I suppose it would give better IQ that a 500mm mirror lens, but that's not saying much. I wish either Tamron, Tokina or Sigma would produce a 500mm lens at f6.3 or f7.1. Right now, the available 500mm primes are very expensive (like Canon's f4). A slower 500mm would be much lighter and far less expensive. I think many photographers would take interest in such a lens.</p>

<p>Phillip. Thanks for the explanation. Certainly another reason the lens sells cheaply. It doesn't sound like it's worth the risk.</p>

<p>Well...there's this:</p>

<p>http://www.adorama.com/SY500P.html?gclid=COf28a-Cg7YCFVKf4Aod_ykA2Q</p>

<p>I've no idea what the quality is like, but for $100 or so you can't go all that far wrong. especially if you're more interested in the image quality in the center of the frame rather than the edges.</p>

<p>I wasn't aware of that Samyang. I checked it out on the internet and it's reported to be not so good to decent. But I saw some photo samples and even the center wasn't too good. Right now I think I'll stay with my 400mm 5.6 and a 1.4 extender when I need 500mm +. As difficult as it is to use, it may presently be my best option considering the inexpensive alternatives.</p>

<p>The basic fact is that there are no inexpensive good 500mm lenses. Some of the 500mm mirror lenses aren't at all bad (see http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/mirror.html) but they are fixed aperture, manual focus and under some conditions show pretty awful "bokeh" with due to the central obstruction (secondary mirror).</p>

<p>If you're very lucky you might find an old manual focus Nikon ED 500/4P IF for $2000 or so. Excellent lens, adapts well to Canon EOS, but manual focus of course and even if you could find one for $2000, that's still not exactly cheap.</p>

<p>Another alternative is a good telescope. Not a spotting scope but an apochromatic telescope optical tube assembly. You can find examples with focal lengths around 500mm and a speed of f6 or f7 for around $600. I've used a TeleVue 500mm f5 telescope as a lens. It's a 4 element design with a fluorite element. However I think the price on the current equivalent (NP 101is) is over $4000, so it's hardly much of a low cost option.</p>

<h1 > </h1>

<p>Bob, I’ve read your excellent article on mirror lenses. The best samples I’ve seen from a mirror is a Sigma 800mm, but it’s quite expensive, and I think my present set up (400mm 5.6 with extender) has better IQ. One option no one mentioned is the Canon 500mm 4.5. It seems like a great lens. The danger here (from what I’ve read) is that Canon no longer repairs these. If you buy one and have an issue, you might be out of luck. That Nikon is a great option if You can get one for a good price. I think the bottom line here is that some lens manufacturer needs to produce a slow 500mm or possibly 600mm lens. A 500mm f7.1 that was sharp wide open could be a big seller. Meanwhile, I’ll look into that Nikon.</p>

<p>I used one of these on a Nikon during the film era. Optical quality definitely much better that the inexpensive [uS $ 100] mirror lens, but no better than the 500mm Nikon mirror lens. I tried one in Canon mount recently. On an EOS 20D and 40D it would autofocus just fine. However, if the aperture was anything other than maximum the camera would lock up. Forget M, P and Tv [s for Nikon users] modes; I just set the aperture to 5.6 in Av mode. [Yes the lens lies to the camera so the camera reads maximum aperture as 5.6] You can find the explanation with a little searching; apparently the problem is the lens does not return the correct code after the aperture has closed so the camera thinks there is something wrong with the diaphragm mechanism.</p>