« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 18 posts | 
by absu on Wed Mar 15, 2017 11:37 am
User avatar
absu
Forum Contributor
Posts: 310
Joined: 17 Jul 2012
Location: West Bengal, India
Brad hill has posted an interesting comparison between Nikon 500 E and Sigma recent 500 mm sport. He has found both of these two lens are identical in image IQ,in autofocus segment sigma actually surpass Nikon.

Any pro here is using this new Sigma or have tested it.
If this result is replicated Nikon super tele will be in trouble.

http://www.naturalart.ca/voice/blog.html#500mm_wars_8
Anirban Basu

"Beauty is simply reality seen with the eyes of love" 
— Rabindranath Tagore

Email: anirbanbasu0606@gmail.com
 

by E.J. Peiker on Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:09 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
I have one on order.  Sigma Sport and Art lenses are every bit as good and often better than the similar OEM lenses.
P.S. I made your URL above clickable ;)
 

by absu on Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:17 pm
User avatar
absu
Forum Contributor
Posts: 310
Joined: 17 Jul 2012
Location: West Bengal, India
E.J. Peiker wrote:I have one on order.  Sigma Sport and Art lenses are every bit as good and often better than the similar OEM lenses.
P.S. I made your URL above clickable ;)
But Super tele category is all together different ball game. No third party lens till not able to invade there. Sigma's effort is commendable. Waiting for your valuable analysis EJ. Thanks Sir for your edit on URL.
Anirban Basu

"Beauty is simply reality seen with the eyes of love" 
— Rabindranath Tagore

Email: anirbanbasu0606@gmail.com
 

by david fletcher on Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:56 pm
User avatar
david fletcher
Moderator
Posts: 34205
Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Location: UK
Member #:00525
I've been more than happy with my Art lens. Have been looking at Brad's posts since inception on the 500 Sport and other than a minor blip recently on focus shift between high speed sequences, this lens looks more than on the money.
Make your life spectacular!

NSN00525
 

by Neilyb on Thu Mar 16, 2017 2:45 am
User avatar
Neilyb
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2763
Joined: 7 Feb 2008
Location: Munich
Have to say it does look like a nice piece of glass. Slightly heavier than the Canon but not by much. I wonder how well it will fair against the Canon when using TC's?

TDP samples and review are up but when selecting 60D or 7DII the Sigma with TC is sharper. When selecting 1DsIII the Canon is far superior. So pinch of salt as quite often his samples contradict each other (and the review).

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Revi ... &APIComp=0

As I am thinking of upgrading my old 500 f4 this comes at a good time.

But, on the subject of focus shift, this is something I noticed with my 120-300 Sport when shooting (oddly enough) squirrels. Squirrels sitting still munching nuts 5M away, I would be shooting maybe 5fps on my 1D4 and get 1-3 in 10 sharp, 1 sharp, 2 not sharp, 1 sharp... even shooting at f5.6 or f8 still produced unfocused shots, which means the focus shifted quite a bit. Which led me to sell the lens to someone shooting racing cars. I was again reminded of Sigma's inconsistencies with regards AF. I was always happy with sharpness and build however.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Thu Mar 16, 2017 7:25 am
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Let's make sure we use the right terms. Focus shift is something completely different from what the reviewer described. The reviewer described slight shot to shot focus inconsistency. Focus shift is when a lens has a different focus point when you don't refocus the lens but simply change aperture.

This type of shot to shot focus inconsistency is inherent to using continuous autofocus on a stationary subject. When in AF-C or AI Servo, the focus system uses algorithms to predict where the subject is going to be at the time of exposure which is later than when the shutter button is tripped. Some camera and lens combos are a bit overdamped in this regard and don't shift fast enough, others are underdamped and shift a bit too much - this underdamped scenario leads to slight focus inconsistency from shot to shot when using continuous AF on a totally stationary subject. On the Sigma Sport lenses, this damping can be fine tuned with the Sigma dock so I think this can easily be remedied if it is even real. Remember that we are looking at one sample from one reviewer at this point.
 

by TigTillinghast on Thu Mar 16, 2017 8:06 pm
TigTillinghast
Forum Contributor
Posts: 5
Joined: 16 Feb 2017
Neilyb wrote: TDP samples and review are up but when selecting 60D or 7DII the Sigma with TC is sharper. When selecting 1DsIII the Canon is far superior. So pinch of salt as quite often his samples contradict each other (and the review).

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Revi ... &APIComp=0

I am NOT criticizing Bryan over at TDP, as he does great work, and just lots of work for all of us wishing to have test shot comparisons of lenses. But I will say that sometimes there are seeming internal inconsistencies with the data, which might be a product of some shots not getting critical focus or whatnot. A big issue for his methods is the fact that he gets one random sample to represent the greater population of that lens. It happens that there is a lot of sample variation with many lenses. 

I love his site, and I use it for getting a good idea of the general gist of what a lens would do relative to another, recognizing that one or both might not be shown in their best light. 

There are some comparisons of lenses in that massive database of his that show the wrong winner relative to my own copies of the same lenses. But it's the option we have, and I'm grateful for it. 

Saint Roger over at Lens Rentals will often do deep dives with lens tests that include 10 sample copies, but he can only do but so many lenses.

In any case, I'm eager to see the Sigma 500 come down in price a little bit and start to control the pricing of the Canon equivalents by its very presence. Still not really in my range. 

-Tig Tillinghast

PS: Too bad about the Canon teleconverters not working. 
 

by E.J. Peiker on Thu Mar 16, 2017 11:57 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
TigTillinghast wrote: PS: Too bad about the Canon teleconverters not working. 
Sigma makes a matched TC, you would likely be better off with one made for the lens anyway.
 

by Neilyb on Fri Mar 17, 2017 3:08 am
User avatar
Neilyb
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2763
Joined: 7 Feb 2008
Location: Munich
E.J. Peiker wrote:Let's make sure we use the right terms.  Focus shift is something completely different from what the reviewer described.  The reviewer described slight shot to shot focus inconsistency.  Focus shift is when a lens has a different focus point when you don't refocus the lens but simply change aperture.

This type of shot to shot focus inconsistency is inherent to using continuous autofocus on a stationary subject.  When in AF-C or AI Servo, the focus system uses algorithms to predict where the subject is going to be at the time of exposure which is later than when the shutter button is tripped.  Some camera and lens combos are a bit overdamped in this regard and don't shift fast enough, others are underdamped and shift a bit too much - this underdamped scenario leads to slight focus inconsistency from shot to shot when using continuous AF on a totally stationary subject.  On the Sigma Sport lenses, this damping can be fine tuned with the Sigma dock so I think this can easily be remedied if it is even real.  Remember that we are looking at one sample from one reviewer at this point.
OK, sorry for the confusion ;)

Of course there will be some fall-out from a still subject but the Sigma lenses I have used over the years were all pretty terrible in this regard, where my Canon lenses were not. I first had a problem with the Sigma 500 f4.5 DG, which could be a brilliant lens when it did focus (and usually managed in very good light) but hit rates were low in many cases, such as the above scenario. A trip to Sigma did not throw up any problems and all was fine apparently. When I moved to a Canon 500mm f4.5 and also 300mm 2.8 IS with or without TC's I was not suffering the same problems (used on 1DsII and 5D bodies).

Once I had the Canon 500 f4 I had a gap in my focal lengths and bought the Sigma 120-300 and USB dock. I spent an absolute age setting that thing up. But again in the above situation it was an absolute nightmare. Birds, squirrels and even wild boar (which were not so close). Hit rate was poor. Sigma checked the lens and reported all was fine (within tolerances). My Canon 200-400, does not suffer those problems on close up subjects that stop moving.

So on my own experience I am not overly optimistic. That a single reviewer mentions exactly the same problem I had with older Sigma lenses is a little saddening because they make sharp, well built lenses. But I agree, more reviews are in order.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Fri Mar 17, 2017 8:15 am
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Older Sigmas are completely different animals in every regard from modern Art and Sport designated lenses and one should not draw a parallel. I would agree on the older lenses but have never experienced that with a Sport or an Art lens - hit rate, once focus tuned with the Sigma dock has been every bit as good as native OEM lenses. I'll soon have a Sigma 500 f/4 and the dedicated 1.4x for testing (perhaps as early as next week) so I'll be able to assess all of this better.
 

by Neilyb on Fri Mar 17, 2017 2:34 pm
User avatar
Neilyb
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2763
Joined: 7 Feb 2008
Location: Munich
Would trust your review E.J. But on which system?
 

by E.J. Peiker on Fri Mar 17, 2017 3:34 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Neilyb wrote:Would trust your review E.J. But on which system?
Nikon.
 

by Neilyb on Fri Mar 31, 2017 2:22 am
User avatar
Neilyb
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2763
Joined: 7 Feb 2008
Location: Munich
http://www.ejphoto.com/Quack%20PDF/Sigm ... Review.pdf

A very thorough review E.J :) But what worries me is this Focus Shift (when stopping down). How much of a problem is it really?
 

by E.J. Peiker on Fri Mar 31, 2017 8:53 am
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Neilyb wrote:http://www.ejphoto.com/Quack%20PDF/Sigm ... Review.pdf

A very thorough review E.J :) But what worries me is this Focus Shift (when stopping down). How much of a problem is it really?
I edited the link to the review only without all the other stuff.  We will be putting it up on NSN next week as well.

As for focus shift, I was surprised by it but I am not the only reviewer that noticed it so it isn't a function of just the review lens.  You are not likely to even realize the lens has that characteristic unless you do the Sigma Dock cal and look at it at different apertures.  If it's a real problem in the real world, I think it's a bit too soon but do realize that the difference is only about 3 points of focus cal which is right on the verge of being within the shot to shot repeatability although it is consistent.  Also this is version 1.0 of the lens firmware and Sigma has continuously improved lenses like the 150-600 so I would not be surprised to see a FW update that dials that out as they get more feedback.  On the 150-600, the focus performance and accuracy today is in a completely different league than it was when the lens first came out after three FW updates.
 

by Mike in O on Fri Mar 31, 2017 9:28 am
Mike in O
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2673
Joined: 22 Dec 2013
Neilyb wrote:http://www.ejphoto.com/Quack%20PDF/Sigm ... Review.pdf

A very thorough review E.J :) But what worries me is this Focus Shift (when stopping down). How much of a problem is it really?
Read through the reviews and enjoyed reading.  One caveat though, the overpriced Sony 500 can be had in Japan for less than $9,000 (it seems to be reserved for the Japanese market and priced to not sell in other markets).  This means it is available if you want to go to the trouble of ordering from Japan.  Hard to believe but it is the oldest of the 500f4's.
 

by bias_hjorth on Wed Apr 05, 2017 3:30 pm
User avatar
bias_hjorth
Forum Contributor
Posts: 293
Joined: 25 Aug 2008
Location: Denmark
Sigma was kind enough to lend me this lens about a month ago. I had it around 3 weeks but since the weather wasn't all to sunny and joyful I have somewhat limited experience with it.
Some of the stuff I learned in this period:

All on 7d Mark II

Sharp wide open
Fast focusing still with the Sigma 1.4
Relatively well balanced
OEM build quality
Love Sigma's OS and the ability to adjust it via software

Compared to the 400MM DO II:
Not a sharp bare lens, less so with the 1.4 (Canon or Sigma) and even less so with the 2.0 (Canon or Sigma)  BUT still usable wide open with all but the 2x
Bare in mind the 400 DO II is still impressively sharp wide open even the 2x. In fact I can't really think of a sharper lens (perhaps the 300 F2.8 is just as good.
Slower focusing, but still very quick bare lens and with the 1.4x - So and so with the 2x
More audible focus engine
Better OS than IS
Same build quality

Compared to the 300-800 F5.6:
Sharpness better wide open. Not stopped down
Lighter (obviously)
Faster focusing
Better build quality

Compared to the Sigma 500mm F4.5
MUCH better sharpness and contrast wide open
Fast focusing
Better build quality

In a different league than all below:

Compared to the 150-600 S:
Sharper. Much more so using 1.4 and 2x 
Faster focusing
Comparable OS
Slighty better build quality

Compared to the 150-600 C:
Sharper. Much more so using 1.4 and 2x 
Faster focusing
Comparable OS
Much better build quality

Compared to the 150-600 G2:
Sharper. Much more so using 1.4 and 2x 
Faster focusing
Comparable OS
Much better build quality

So I don't have access to the 500mm IS II right now but it's probably 90% the performance of the 500 II lens. Also I think the 500 II is comparable to the 400mm DO II optically perhaps with the latter being ever so slightly better wide open and faster focusing.


Edit:
I missed EJ's review but you might be better off reading his much more thorough review.
Feel free to visit http://www.tobiashjorth.com or join me on Facebook add me on Twitter
 

by DChan on Wed Apr 05, 2017 5:26 pm
DChan
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2206
Joined: 9 Jan 2009
Brad Hill is keeping the Sigma.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Sat Aug 19, 2017 3:23 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Sigma 500mm Revisited...

Earlier in the year I published my review of the new Sigma 500mm f/4 lens.  You can read it here in our articles section:
https://www.naturescapes.net/articles/r ... ns-review/

I am just completing my trip to Brazil’s Pantanal, I have a few more words to say about it.  This was by far the most challenging and most thorough field test that my Sigma 500 lens has faced and it came through it with flying colors.  The image quality is absolutely stunning even when shooting it in very difficult conditions.  Many of the shots were taken off of a boat handheld in low light.  In some cases I had to hand hold exposures as low as 1/200 sec from a boat that is bobbing in the water and virtually every image where I didn’t miss the subject with the AF sensors was absolutely sharp.  The Optical Image Stabilization in this lens is insanely good.  This was also by far the most challenging test of the Sigma TC-1401 1.4x teleconverter and again I am extremely impressed.  This combination far exceeded what my previous 500mm lens with TC setup, the Nikkon AF-S 500mm f/4G VR and Nikon TCE-14 III was able to provide.  Similarly on a tripod, the image quality far exceeded my expectations.  I must note that the lens has been very carefully calibrated to my body through the distance range using the Sigma dock and their Optimization Pro software.  Overall I am over the moon with this lens and the fact that it costs  $4000 less than the Nikon lens makes me wonder why anyone would purchase the new Nikon 500mm f/4E lens.
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
18 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group