Sigma 50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX DG HSM & New Sigma 50-500 OS Test

[SkyBaby]

Thanks for the feedback....I took it out again today, and seems like I am getting used to shooting it...

Phil

Sure thing!!  What kind of processing did you do to the pictures?

[SkyBaby]

Well you say "new" so they may have fixed some of there issues over the older version...But I rented one for my Sony camera last year and was not impressed in the least bit.  The lens was very, very week at the +400mm range, and those shots were just very soft and not sharp at all.  Sometimes I did get lucky and get some good shots, but they were very rare.  There are a few others here who have or have rented the lens and Sigma time and time again does not have good long range lenses (IMHO).

I was in the same boat as you, I was looking for my first "Big" lens and of course the Sigma line was one that I looked very hard at.  In particular I looked at the 120-400mm and the 50-500mm.  Both got relatively good reviews from dpReview, and users on Amazon.  So I rented the lens, and didn't like it, and that's when I found many other negative reviews from "aviation photographers"  I think it gets bad hits from us, because we spend most of our time taking shots of planes at the long end of the focal length, Sigma's weak spot.  Don't get me wrong I did get some really clean shots at the other end of the spectrum of 50mm.  But these were all static shots, which I had to back up quite a bit (luckily it was media day and I could do that).  The only thing I really got out of the Bigma was it's huge focal range...but what do you want, A huge focal length range, or sharper images?  I choose the later.

In the end I ponied up the extra $500 for the higher end Sony brand 70-400mm, which so far is very solid at the 400mm range.. a lot better then the Sigma.  But you know as many people have said in the past, you get what you pay for.  

I was talking about the new one with OS.  If it was between the original Bigma (the non OS 50-500) and Canon's 100-400L, I'd totally go for the Canon.  I do a lot of wildlife photography, almost as much I do aviation photography.  Looking at shots of birds shot with the new Stigma taken at the long range, and hearing what wildlife photographers said about it, I think it might be the lens for me.  The jury is still out.  I'm no where near ready to buy another lens, so I will be researching and reading reviews for a long while. 

It seems with Sigma, there's a lot more copy variation than with Canon's lenses.  I've seen some majorly sharp shots at the long range come out of the Sigma.  I've also heard of some really bad copies that are soft at any range.  As I said, I haven't completely made up my mind.  I'm gonna try both.  I'll start with the Stigma and see if I can barrow a friend's 100-400L and compare them side by side.  Who knows, maybe I'll get lucky and get a really nice copy of the Stigma. 

[Phil Myers]

I use photoshop, but honestly I did very little....

[Midnight Mover]

I did look at this one at PMA 2010. Yes, needs to be push/pull. Did not like the feel compaired to the 100-400 L Canon. Just my 2 cents

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/50-500mm-f45-63-dg-os-hsm-sigma

[HolzAir]

Here.... I found a cool pic that was taken with the Sigma 500mm.

I want to take pic's like this..

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6336463

Wow you would think with the price of airline tickets you would be able to afford a little paint.