Canon Reviews

First the technical data
Specifications

Filter Size 77mm
F-Stop Range 2.8 - 32
Minimum Focus Distance 72" (6')
Magnification 1:7.8
Zoom/Focus Control Two-Touch (Twist)
Angle Of View 43.3 (70mm) - 12.3 (200mm)
Groups/Elements 14 / 17
Length 7.1"
Max. Diameter 3.4"
Weight 49 Oz.
Specialties "Hyper Sonic Motor" For Quiet And Smother AF, Instant Manual Focus Override In AF Mode, Low Dispersion Glass, Non-Rotating Front Ring, Tripod Collar

I have owned this lens for about a year now in the Canon EOS mount. When first considering this lens, I debated over buying it or the more expensive Canon version. After reading numerous reviews, it was obvious that many other users felt this to be a great lens, comparable to Canon's, but at a much lower cost. So, I decided to get the Sigma version. I have never been sorry for that decision.

I should note that I have used both this lens and the Canon equivalent, so comparisons can be drawn from this. I have not used any comparable Nikon or other lenses in this focal range.

This lens allows for great versatility. There are numerous scenarios in which this lens performs well. Below are just a few.

Positives
1) The 2.8 aperture allows for great low light photography, or dusk/dawn outdoor photos
2) In the 85-135mm range, the constant 2.8 aperture makes this a very good portrait lens; throwing the background out of focus and making the subject stand out.
3) With the Sigma 2x APO teleconverter, this lens becomes a very nice 140-400mm 5.6. It will still autofocus with all Canon EOS bodies, and produces sharp photos despite the 2X converter.
4) High Speed focusing motor, rivals Canon's USM technology
5) APO, low dispersion glass produces top quality images with clear, contrasty images
6) Full time manual focus
7) Tripod mount is included, something that Canon will make you pay for...
8) Very sturdy lens design, solidly constructed

Negatives
1) Tends to hunt just slightly more than the Canon Version. This is easily overcome with full time manual focus
2) When the hood is attached in the "storage" position (reversed on the end of the lens) the full time manual focus ring is hard to manipulate
3) HSM is just slightly slower than USM (Canon's ultrasonic focusing technology)
4) Lens is heavy, but so are all similar lenses. I suggest a monopod if prolonged use is expected

...

Sigma also has a new 100-300mm F4 lens that is similar in quality and design to this 70-200mm version. If you tend to stay at the longer focal lengths and don't need the extra 2.8 f stop, then I would suggest looking into the 100-300 F4 lens that is new to the market.

Overall, I am very happy with the performance of this lens. In my opinion it is well worth the price tag and with the money you save over the Canon version can be spent it in other areas. I used the extra savings to purchase the 2X teleconverter and a few 77mm filters.

...Thanks for your time...

I shot the illustrations for an antique price guide with this lens and got compliments on the slides from the publisher, so it definitely gives proffesional quality results. These days I prefer working with a longer macro lens, so you can get a little more working distance between you and the subject, but that is a matter of taste, and the longer lenses cost more.

This is my current favorite lens and the one that resides most often upon my camera. It certainly is the sharpest lens that I own. I use it for ordinary photography as well as for macro photography. As I shoot plant life with the macro capability, I don't mind the short working distance (distance from front element of the lens to subject, about 2 inches), as the plants don't run away when you close in on them. If you want to shoot bugs, etc, you probably want a longer focal length macro (longer focal length=larger working distance). The lens is capable of life-size reproductions without accessories, a definite plus over the Canon made 50mm macro lens.
This lens makes a great general purpose normal lens, as the very high optical quality for the macro uses leads to excellent sharpness and freedom from abberations at distance. The only drawback to the lens is its rather slow (for a 50mm prime lens) maximum aperature of F/2.8. As I usually shoot in sunlight or with high-speed films (or both!), this has never been a problem for me, but others may prefer a faster maximum aperature.
I've shot with this lens with all its aperatures from wide open to F/45 and found, in my subjective eyeball test (I look at prints and slides), that the optical performance varries very little over the aperature range, being uniformly excellent.
Overall, a fine lens for an even finer price.

Similar considerations apply to Canon, so here is what I said about the 500mm f4.5 Sigma vs similar glass from Nikon:

The Sigma gets decent reviews, but for the same price you can get a brand-new 400mm f3.5 Nikkor (or a used 500mm f4P Nikkor). THese are sharper, faster, and (IMPORTANT!) better-built. Add a TC-14b teleconverter for about 10% more and you also have a 560mm f5 (or 700mm f5.6) that is sharper than the Sigma. A used 400mm f3.5 Nikkor is maybe $1500 to $2000 (this is the choice most people should make, but be sure you can return it if it's a clinker).

A BIGGIE: The resale value of the Nikkor is much better. I could (but never will) sell my Nikkors (bought used) for more than I paid after using them for years.

The only "advantage" of the Sigma is Autofocus, which may not work all that well if other reviewers' comments or my experience with a Sigma 400mm f5.6 are any indication. However, if you are a high-end sports freak or flying bird weenie, you already own high-end AF gear, or will be frustrated until you do. Most other subjects don't need AF. Indeed, in a recent butterfly hunt in a wildflower plot, I got consistently better slides in manual mode than an experienced friend with new Nikon AF gear. It's pretty tricky to get the AF to focus on the butterfly's head instead of its back wing or the flower petals.

Also, the 500mm Sigma weighs almost 7 lb, more than the far more versatile Nikkor + TC-14b combination. (A 400mm f2.8 AF Nikkor weighs 14 lb! What price AF?)

Bottom line: Buy the good stuff -- you get better performance and save money (because of resale value).

I am a wildlife photographer in South Africa and I briefly owned both the Nikon and Canon versions of this lens. I used the lens on a Nikon F100 body and found that it did not autofocus properly, due to presumably software conflict between the lens and the body. I swopped it for the Canon version, but it had the same problem when used with the EOS 3. The Nikon version did not autofocus with the Sigma 1.4 and 2.0 APO extenders. The Canon version did focus with the Sigma 1.4 extender, but not with the 2.0. THe lens has exceptionally good optics, and resolution, contrast and colour saturation is excellent. The build-quality is not bad, but not up to the same standard as the equivalent Canon lens. The large tripod mount is very handy, and the lens is very well balanced when used on a tripod. THe lens is very well priced, but unless Sigma ensures that it functions perfectly with the latest top end Canon and Nikon SLR's, it will not be an option for pro's or serious amateurs.

I got this lens to replace my 600mm reflector which is fixed aperture with a dreadfully small depth of focus. This lens is spectacular by comparison: excellent focus depth, with F4-6.3 it is light-strong enough to get away with a lot of stuff that reflector lenses don't allow as they suck so much light. I do motorsport and nature photography, so fast exposure times are key, and this lens allows for good flexibility in difficult light conditions or where you need to be super-quick without compromising depht-of-focus. I use this lens on a Canon EOS 7E elan, and this is an outstanding combo for motosport and nature shots, since both the lens and the camera are very quick and very quiet. My two only complaints with this product are the weight (very heavy, bring Advil to shooting a whole Grand Prix weekend!)and the fact that the zoom is a little slow-going, but maybe that'll easen up with more use. Overall another very solid Sigma product, unbeatable value for the money. I shut off the autofocus sometimes when I do difficult action pics where there's potential for automatic focussing errors, but if you don't, be prepared to bring extra batteries, since moving the autofocus in a big lens like this will suck the power out of your camera in no time.

Heavy as lead. Slight "stickiness" in the zoom when changing directions at full extension, but nothing major, feels like it will work out. Nice finish, kind of retro, speckled, grainy finish, good gripping and looking. Good, very quiet focusing. Excellent sharpness, using it on a D30 digital, so can't really tell about aberrations at widest and longest, since I lose the edges with my CMOS anyway. FOR THE MONEY, I don't think you have a better choice. Of course, if you can afford it, get the Canon "L." Don't think you'll be disappointed for the price.

I just recently got into photography as a retirement hobby and was fortunate to be able to acquire a Canon D60 within two days of ordering one from Kaimuki Camera Store in Honolulu.

To complete the Canon system I purchased Canon Lenses, the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM, EF 28-70mm f/2.8L USM, Canon EF 75-300mm f/4.5-6 IS USM, and a Canon EF 35-350mm f/3.5-5.6L USM. I also got a Tamron 28-300mm UltraZoom XR f/3.5-6.3 LD Aspherical Macro, and my daughter got me the Sigma EX 50-500mm f/4-6.3 APO RF Zoom lens, along with the Sigma 2.0 teleconvertor lens, for my retirement party.

This Sigma 50-500 lens is like magic for me in that I've taken pictures of the city from my balcony and upon proccessing the images on my computer there are images that I didn't even know were there through my naked eye. I was amazed that I could read freeway signs that were easily over ten miles away.

Tonight my wife, daughter and I went out to shoot pictures of the full moon. We were all pleasantly surprised when we could see the details of the moon's surface, with the craters and other distinct features. By the way, I did have the Sigma 2X teleconvertor attached. If I'm not mistaken, along with the extra teleconvertor's 2X power, the magnification was also further enhanced by the inherent 1.6 mutiplier effect through the digital camera's characteristics.

All of the other reviewers are correct in their opinion of the 50-500's weight. It is heavy, and so far, I've gotten a lot of comments about the neat "retro" look with the crinkled black finish just as Bluegun opined. I also noticed that on several occassions people in front of me actually moved aside to give me room to shoot pictures at our Aloha Week events and once at a University of Hawaii sporting event. I guess the big tripod, and once, monopod monted Sigma zoom possibly gave me the look of a pro, which, of course, I'm far from.

I really like Sigma's locking feature so that the lens won't creep open when moving about. Also, when trying to manually focus the lens it is pretty tight, or sticky, as Bluegun has noted, however, I may be wrong, but I kind of like it tight rather than having it too loose. When I checked for comparisons in features/pricing this Sigma 50-500 is a definite bargain. I can't seem to find any comparable Canon lens with that range of the 50-500. The closest Canon has is not anywhere near Sigma's price points. Of course I pretty well believe that Canon's quality/price against Sigma's is definitly not comparing apples and apples. What Sigma has done, however, is help to make a big powerful lens that is affordable for just about anyone who can't affordably justify Canon's at the moment. Case in point - Sigma's 50-500 zoom has made it possible for my daughter to have the luxury of purchsing a good as well as impressive "big lens" for her daddy on her student's budget.

I purchased this lens mainly for the macro feature and I now find not only is it great for macro close-up photography it is also a great all around lens. I have since replaced the standard Canon 35-80mm lens that came with my Canon Rebel G with the Sigma lens as it outperforms the Canon lens. I gave it a four star instead of five only because I feel that the focus and zoom ring could perform a bit more smoother.

I received the lens from Amazon promptly and in perfect condition as allways.

I was skeptical about buying a 3rd party lens, I can say I have been impressed with this Sigma lens. I have not used the macro feature, but the rest od the lens functions nicely. I am new to photography and so far this lens has performed very well.

I purchased the lens through Amazon which made the process simple. If any of you have tried to deal with camera warehouses you know that speed is not always a high priority. 1 - 2 weeks is not a long wait (I got my lens in about 10 days). Plus the assurance of Amazon also helps.

First of all you have to be carefull and take a look from what kind of material is made your lens.Most lenses in this class are made from plastic which is not good at all but the price can be lower for example as a CANON lens 28-80, they are also little bit lighter.This lens is different.Body of the lens is metal and the fitting to the camera is also made from metal.Why is so important.Because when you have the lens little longer and lens is made from plastic there is a lot of possibilities that this lens is gonna change his inside settings of glass ,because the weather(sun,rain,humidity) what can really effects your pictures.Second thing is focusing mechanism which is inside of this lens makes confortable use and holding cameras.Very helpfull seems to be macro function which is very nice in this class.I have one by my own and I would like to fully recommend this lens for using a camera on a daily basis.Acctually you can not buy better lens for price like this on the market at this time.