Canon 500mm or Sigma 500mm

[michael_riggs]

I am looking at picking up a VERY nice telephoto lens for wildlife

work come summer time. I would be using the lens to photograph bears

in mountain and woodland environments. Right now it has come down to

either the Canon 500mm f/4.5 or the Sigma 500mm f/4.5 (non-dg

version). I have narrowed it down to these because of their

capabilities and price (can't afford 500mm f/4).

 

Canon: discontinued about a decade ago, top-notch construction and

overall quality. $3500 and up. 1 florite and 1 LD element.

 

Sigma: Recently discontinued so brand new ones available with long

warranty. $2500 and up. 2 UD elements.

 

Neither lens has IS/OS, both have received great reviews on various

photo forum sites citing build, optical, and autofocus quality.

Which lens would you recommend with price being an important factor.

 

IF YOU HAVE NOT USED A PARTICULAR LENS AND TALK TRASH ABOUT IT, I

WON'T CARE.

 

Thank you.

[mark_chappell]

The Sigma is recently discontinued? Still in the B&H catalog, albeit with the 'DG'

symbology and a much higher price than I remember.

 

I think your choice may boil down to whether you want to gamble on being able to repair

the Canon, if it breaks -- I recall a thread some time ago in which the AF motor broke on

this lens and there were no in-stock parts. Or, whether you want to gamble on the

compatability of the Sigma with future Canon cameras -- their redent record for upward

compatability seems

better than in the past, but it's still a gamble.

 

I don't own either 500/4.5 lens but have friends who own the Sigma and are very happy

with it. I

know you said you can't afford the 500/4, but the advantages of IS, slighty higher speed,

and undisputably superb optical quality of that lens are considerable.

[michael_riggs]

"The Sigma is recently discontinued? Still in the B&H catalog, albeit with the 'DG' symbology and a much higher price than I remember"

 

The DG is a digital only version and $1000 more expensive than the full frame version. Why, I don't know. Why does it cost more money to fill less frame area?

 

People worry about a lack of future compatability with certain lenses and certain cameras. If things change, well, I'll just have to depend on my 20 year old Pentax 645 that is in excellent condition.

[mark_chappell]

<I>The DG is a digital only version and $1000 more expensive than the full frame version.

Why, I don't know. Why does it cost more money to fill less frame area?</i><P>

 

You're making a wrong assumption here. The new 'DG' lens has a new coating that

supposedly improves performance with DSLRs, but it is quite useable on full-frame

cameras

(it is specified as having a 5 degree angle of view, same as any 500 mm lens on a full-

frame camera). The Sigma lenses that have a reduced image circle and hence won't work

on full frame carry the 'DC' label.<P>

 

I'm not sure if the DG 500/4.5 has had any optical

redesign at all -- just new coatings. The statement on Sigma's website reads, a little

ambiguously:<P>

 

<I>"New coating reduces Ghost and Flare<P>

 

The new multi layer lens coating and lens design reduce flare and ghost, which is a

common problem with digital cameras and also creates an optimum color balance."

</i><P>

 

The statement that flare and ghost is a "common problem" with digital cameras is

fallacious, in my experience -- I've never experienced any ghosting off of the sensor even

though I don't have any "digital only" lenses. As to why Sigma raised the price by $1000

-- only they can answer that. The older version is a very good lens by all the accounts

I've read. Maybe they simply thought that they weren't charging enough.

[rod_bracken]

Which camera do you use? I have the Sigma 500mm. It does NOT autofocus with a 1.4x (Canon) extender on the 1D Mark II. AF with the same 1.4x extender works just fine on my old EOS 3. I like the Sigma a lot. I purchased a lightly used one two months ago for $2200 on fredmiranda.com. I didn't really look at the Canon F4.5 (too rich for my blood.) The build and finish on the Sigma are nice (I have a few Canon L lenses too.) The lens hood attaches nicely. Whichever lens you get, get a Wimberly Sidekick. The whole rig handles much better on the gimbal mount. The F-6 Sidekick Bracket (also from Wimberly) is nice too, it keeps the flash centered over the lens regardless of whether you are shooting horizontally or vertically since it clamps right on the tripod foot. Oh yeah, you'll also need a LONG arca swiss quick release plate. You do have a beefy ball head and at least a Gitzo 1227 right. The lens is ~50% of the battle (75% if you go for the Canon). The accessories really add up. Santa brought me a Lowepro Lens Trekker 600AW for storing/transporting it.

 

That's my one beef (besides the lack of AF with a 1.4x extender on the 1D) with the Sigma: the soft lens case just doesn't cut it (not even for storage in the closet when not in use.) The Lens Trekker is the way to go for the Sigma.

 

Hope this helps. Sorry I can't compare directly to the Canon.

[michael_riggs]

Mark: Thank you for the correction.

 

Rod: I use an Elan 7E, and I have been looking at the gimbal heads out there. More OT at work to beef up my gear fund. :( On teleconverters, would the brand of converter make a difference for having autofocus work?

[yakim_peled1]

<p> <i> </i> </p>

<p> <a href="http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=69791">Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS Vs. Sigma 500mm f/4.5 EX HSM</a> <b></b> </p>

<p> Sorry. Coudn't find a Canon EF 500mm f/4.5 L Vs. Sigma 500mm f/4.5 EX HSM test. HTH anyway.</p>

 

 

 

<p>Happy shooting, <br>

Yakim.</p>