Sigma 500mm 5.6

[keeping_a_balance]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This lens drop was news to me, looks interesting:

 

 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Virob]

First long tele prime for Lmount. Very compact and light, but also quite a bit more expensive than the 2 sigma tele zooms.

[dem331]

Very interesting lens. Thanks for the video. 

[dem331]

Listed at €3200

[Richardgb]

On 2/21/2024 at 6:08 AM, Virob said:

First long tele prime for Lmount. Very compact and light, but also quite a bit more expensive than the 2 sigma tele zooms.

The lenses' MTF curves point to better IQ for the 500mm prime than the 150-600 zoom. This is unsurprising, although that doesn't detract from the versatility of the zoom compared to a fixed focal length, and whether in practice the differences are noticeable. The 500mm prime also has a slightly wider aperture. In summary, these would seem to the reason for the price difference.

[helged]

37 minutes ago, Richardgb said:

The lenses' MTF curves point to better IQ for the 500mm prime than the 150-600 zoom. This is unsurprising, although that doesn't detract from the versatility of the zoom compared to a fixed focal length, and whether in practice the differences are noticeable. The 500mm prime also has a slightly wider aperture. In summary, these would seem to the reason for the price difference.

+1. Weight and size are also factors to consider. Possibly also af speed, but that's too early too conclude on, likewise the optical quality using the 1.4x, 2x extenders.

Edited February 22, 2024 by helged

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Possibly a marginally better quality but I am sure the reason for most of the price difference will be that they expect to sell fewer of them. Most use of long teles is from a fixed shooting position, making a zoom lens far more convenient.

[Manicouagan1]

I pre-ordered one.   When I had a Nikon D850 and the 500mm 5.6 PF lens, I used the combination a lot with and without a 1.4x extender.  When I read about the new Sigma 500 f5.6 and looked at the weight, I went back and reviewed my use of the D850/500mm PF combination.  I realized how many of my best sports and birds in flight shots came with that combination.  With my current SL2 it work fine and largely replace my Sigma 150-600 lens.  The 150-600 works fine for me, but the weight is an issue.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

On 2/23/2024 at 8:58 PM, jaapv said:

Possibly a marginally better quality but I am sure the reason for most of the price difference will be that they expect to sell fewer of them. Most use of long teles is from a fixed shooting position, making a zoom lens far more convenient.

From every review I've seen so far, not marginal. The Sigma 500mm is getting rave reviews for it's optical performance and utter lack of aberrations. Test shots I've seen show OUTSTANDING sharpness across the entire frame. As good as anything made by Canikony.

I have ordered one. I expect it to thoroughly trounce my 150-600 (which I don't like) on my upcoming SL3. The S5II will be less demanding, of course. I also expect superior performance when using teleconverters. The only downside I see is a lack of filter compatibility.

My plan is to have the Sigma 500 with 1.4x on one body and the superb 90-280 on another. That should cover most eventualities.

Gordon

[jaapv]

That is a remarkable achievement. Your plan sounds good. It would not fit my use case though.  I mainly shoot between 400 and 800 mm from a fixed position without tripod. Flexibility of framing trumps an increase in IQ that is limited anyway by atmospheric haze and heat distortion. 
in the past I downgraded from an Apo Telyt 280/4.0 to a Vario Elmar 105-280 4.2 R for that very reason. 
I gave up on SL bodies as the superior stabilization of the Panasonic / Sigma or Lumix combination is of importance to me.  As is the EVF stabilization offered by Sigma, which does not work on Leica bodies AFAIK. I can now shoot my S5ii, 1.4x extender and 60-600 easily at 1/125 at 840 mm handheld. However, working from a tripod in more benign conditions will likely bring out the qualities of the gear that you plan. 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

9 hours ago, jaapv said:

That is a remarkable achievement. Your plan sounds good. It would not fit my use case though.  I mainly shoot between 400 and 800 mm from a fixed position without tripod. Flexibility of framing trumps an increase in IQ that is limited anyway by atmospheric haze and heat distortion. 
in the past I downgraded from an Apo Telyt 280/4.0 to a Vario Elmar 105-280 4.2 R for that very reason. 
I gave up on SL bodies as the superior stabilization of the Panasonic / Sigma or Lumix combination is of importance to me.  As is the EVF stabilization offered by Sigma, which does not work on Leica bodies AFAIK. I can now shoot my S5ii, 1.4x extender and 60-600 easily at 1/125 at 840 mm handheld. However, working from a tripod in more benign conditions will likely bring out the qualities of the gear that you plan. 

I was considering the 60-600 when the 500 was announced. I may still get it. It sounds good. Really good. But generally I'm find myself looking for length. I was pretty happy with 700mm (500 plus 1.4) on my Tanzania/Uganda trip in July. I'm also keeping my A1 and 200-600 for the blackout free shooting experience. I won't be missing anything.

I have the SL2 and S1R. There's zero real world difference in IS performance between the two with my 150-600. The SL2 is class leading in the high resolution bodies. I'd generally say that with Leica APO primes the SL2 is slightly better than the S5II (same results but higher resolution).

I've been playing with my SL2 and 100-400 today. 1/60th of a second is viable for me at 400mm. So about the same as you're getting at 840mm with the Panny.

Gordon

[jaapv]

Panasonic gets to 6.5 stops. 

[pf4eva]

I was about to pull the trigger on that one, however Sigma didn't impress. I'm not sure if IQ quality even better than 100-500 from Canon:
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1684&Camera=1538&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=1510&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

If you compare it to Sigmas own 500/4 for SLR, you can see that new one doesn't look as good either.

Considering it is the same weight as 100-500mm and more expensive than zoom, I think it is just for someone who really want L mount light prime.

I can't wait for Panasonic releasing supertelefoto zoom which is in their roadmap.

[helged]

18 minutes ago, pf4eva said:

I was about to pull the trigger on that one, however Sigma didn't impress. I'm not sure if IQ quality even better than 100-500 from Canon:
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1684&Camera=1538&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=1510&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

If you compare it to Sigmas own 500/4 for SLR, you can see that new one doesn't look as good either.

Considering it is the same weight as 100-500mm and more expensive than zoom, I think it is just for someone who really want L mount light prime.

I can't wait for Panasonic releasing supertelefoto zoom which is in their roadmap.

I have seen nothing but outstanding reviews (and tests) of the Sigma 500 f5.6. The only exception is the link you show. Based on own experience, Sigma lenses can (do) have sample variations. I guess this is can also be the case for the new Sigma 500mm. I have one on order; Sigma states the lens will start to ship on March 12, so it should be around the corner. And if it doesn't meet the tests that I have seen, I will ask for another lens to run new tests. I am actually quite optimistic regarding this lens.

[pf4eva]

1 hour ago, helged said:

I have seen nothing but outstanding reviews (and tests) of the Sigma 500 f5.6. The only exception is the link you show. Based on own experience, Sigma lenses can (do) have sample variations. I guess this is can also be the case for the new Sigma 500mm. I have one on order; Sigma states the lens will start to ship on March 12, so it should be around the corner. And if it doesn't meet the tests that I have seen, I will ask for another lens to run new tests. I am actually quite optimistic regarding this lens.

Don't get me wrong, it is great lens, however for the price I'd expect absolutely stellar results without compromise. If it is a sample variation, it is quite worrying.

[jaapv]

On 3/9/2024 at 9:58 PM, pf4eva said:

I was about to pull the trigger on that one, however Sigma didn't impress. I'm not sure if IQ quality even better than 100-500 from Canon:
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1684&Camera=1538&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=1510&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

If you compare it to Sigmas own 500/4 for SLR, you can see that new one doesn't look as good either.

Considering it is the same weight as 100-500mm and more expensive than zoom, I think it is just for someone who really want L mount light prime.

I can't wait for Panasonic releasing supertelefoto zoom which is in their roadmap.

Quite likely you did not notice that these lenses MUST be used with Electronic Shutter, otherwise the images will be soft. 

[chrismuc]

Jaapv, why would you have to use an electronic shutter to achieve a sharp image? 

[helged]

2 minutes ago, chrismuc said:

Jaapv, why would you have to use an electronic shutter to achieve a sharp image? 

Not @jaapv; but the mechanical shutter introduces vibration, contributing to blurriness (so a well-focussed image appears unsharp). A downside with the electronic shutter is that quickly moving subjects, say birds in flight at close distance, or the wings of insects, may turn deformed due to long readout time from the sensor. All current L-mount sensors are susceptible to this behaviour, SL3 included, but this problem will be reduced as new and faster sensors emerge. An example is given below, shot with SL601, but the newer SL-bodies have rather similar readout speeds.

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, chrismuc said:

Jaapv, why would you have to use an electronic shutter to achieve a sharp image? 

Because the high-frequency vibrations from shutter slap cannot be compensated by the IS nor by high shutter speeds. I recognize the risk of distortion at very fast moving subjects but I have never seen it on wildlife,  even with flying birds. I think you need to photograph something like a Kolibrie or Sunbird on a flower to have a problem. It has been mentioned dozens of times on this forum. 

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

Because the high-frequency vibrations from shutter slap cannot be compensated by the IS nor by high shutter speeds. I recognize the risk of distortion at very fast moving subjects but I have never seen it on wildlife,  even with flying birds. I think you need to photograph something like a Kolibrie or Sunbird on a flower to have a problem. It has been mentioned dozens of times on this forum. 

With Lumix, one could eliminate the shutter shock using EFCS. I would assume that the shutter shock exists only below 1/250 second, but one needs to check that for individual cameras. (Nikon does automatic switching from EFCS to mechanical at 1/250)