fraga wrote:
It won't be a true 600mm (even when focused at infinity).
On top of that, it will also have severe focus breathing at MFD, further (probably dramatically) reducing the focal length.
And aperture starts at f5! 150mm f5! Too slow, IMHO... F6.3 at 600mm is perfectly understandable, f5 at 150mm not so much.
And for $1500, quite honestly I don't expect good IQ from such a large zoom.
Of course, both variants of the sigma 50-500 have a reputation for good IQ (and it's a 10x zoom)... so we will see.
I don't have much expectations, though....
p.s.
I hope I'm wrong.
Here is a crazy idea. How about a 600/6.3 prime that is really 600mm? And is reasonably sharp at 600 meaning you don't have to back off to 500mm just to see what kind animal was in the pic. I know that would be foolish since most people buying that lens want it for 10 different things even if it's not good at any of them.
Yes, I can't envision them selling it for less than $100 per lens element, and certainly more considering the VC elements and associated circuitry. Even aside from their internal costs, at this f/stop range, I'd guess the marketplace would favor the price in the $2,500-$4,500 range (depending on the IQ).
Yes, I can't envision them selling it for less than $100 per lens element, and certainly more considering the VC elements and associated circuitry. Even aside from their internal costs, at this f/stop range, I'd guess the marketplace would favor the price in the $2,500-$4,500 range (depending on the IQ).
fraga wrote:
It won't be a true 600mm (even when focused at infinity).
On top of that, it will also have severe focus breathing at MFD, further (probably dramatically) reducing the focal length.
And aperture starts at f5! 150mm f5! Too slow, IMHO... F6.3 at 600mm is perfectly understandable, f5 at 150mm not so much.
And for $1500, quite honestly I don't expect good IQ from such a large zoom.
Of course, both variants of the sigma 50-500 have a reputation for good IQ (and it's a 10x zoom)... so we will see.
I don't have much expectations, though....
p.s.
I hope I'm wrong.
Well the Canon 100-400 is not a true 400mm either (385mm), and the Sigma 50/150-500 aren't true 500mm (465mm) lenses. The patent say 582mm, so that's pretty darn good for a cheap zoom.
Nov 07, 2013 at 03:21 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
No long zoom lens whatever brand is not a "true" lens, when it comes to the name (focal length). And most prime lenses are not that either. Even if they normally are much closer. It's just a rounding to the closest common focal length. If they didn't do it like that, we would have lenses like 104-385, 26-69, 72-194 zooms. And prime lenses like 197, 294, 492 and so on........
Andrew J wrote:
Here is a crazy idea. How about a 600/6.3 prime that is really 600mm? And is reasonably sharp at 600 meaning you don't have to back off to 500mm just to see what kind animal was in the pic. I know that would be foolish since most people buying that lens want it for 10 different things even if it's not good at any of them.
Canon could own this market with a reasonably priced - as in under $5K - high quality 125-500 f4-5.6L IS. I'd sell my 100-400L in a heartbeat. If they went to a 600mm zoom we'd start looking at $7K+ alas.
My real hope is for Sigma to pull it's finger out and offer some excellent sport series supertele zooms that are a big step up from the 50/150-500 budget zooms. They'd offer something for far less than half what Canon asks these days.
I imagine most people will use it at max focal length 90-99% of the time
I would
Canon has priced the 500, 600, 800mm lens out of reach. Canon is not even a consideration.
other long lens options must be found --- the Tamrom 150-600 is a possibility
if it out-performs my Canon 400mm F5.6 + 1.4X for IQ and focus at 600mm F6.3 it is a winner
abqnmusa wrote:
I imagine most people will use it at max focal length 90-99% of the time
I would
Canon has priced the 500, 600, 800mm lens out of reach. Canon is not even a consideration.
other long lens options must be found --- the Tamrom 150-600 is a possibility
if it out-performs my Canon 400mm F5.6 + 1.4X for IQ and focus at 600mm F6.3 it is a winner
Strong rumours Sigma will offer a 300 f/2.8 and 400 f/2.8 OS sooner rather than later, and there are plans for 500/600 primes and a new 800mm zoom. While I ponied up for the 500 II, I was able to offset a huge chunk of the price by selling my old 500, but for something like an 800mm or 400 f/2.8 I'd definitely look at the Sigmas instead for a fraction of Canon's prices.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Canon could own this market with a reasonably priced - as in under $5K - high quality 125-500 f4-5.6L IS. I'd sell my 100-400L in a heartbeat. If they went to a 600mm zoom we'd start looking at $7K+ alas.
My real hope is for Sigma to pull it's finger out and offer some excellent sport series supertele zooms that are a big step up from the 50/150-500 budget zooms. They'd offer something for far less than half what Canon asks these days.
+1 on both counts
That MTF chart looks very good to me for a zoom. The 10mm lines give us a measure of contrast, the 30mm lines a measure of sharpness. Sagittal lines mean radial and Meridional mean circumferential. The good thing is it looks pretty good at 600mm.
Here's the Sigma 50-500/150-500 MTF's for comparison. It looks like the Tamron is beating those two out. based on what my friend was showing me with his 50-500, which I was already surprised at how good it was, this might be a pretty darn good lens. Let's wait and see if the real world analysis backs this up. http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/Telecorder/1Bigmav150-500MTF.jpg
I should add the fly in the ointment for the Tamron could be the bokeh at 600mm. The wide separation between the sagittal and meridional lines at 600mm could mean a harsher bokeh. usually good bokeh comes when these lines are closer together. it doesn't seem worse than the 150-500 however, so that may be a reference point.
Based on this alone the Tamron would be seen to be in with a good chance of being a good lens. It's bokeh doens't look like it'll be any worse and I've never complained about bokeh on my 100-400L
digitalbug30d wrote:
how do you know? price doesn't always equal quality of output...proof the 18-55 STM and the 18-55 IS.
While that's true, we are talking about a 600mm lens. Minor aberrations are magnified a lot more. What a 55mm lens can get away with is not the case for a 600mm lens.
Anyway the proof of the pudding is in the eating. can't wait for the lens to be available and the reviews to roll in.
I mean people have the reactionary responses oh its 1500.00 it must suck attitude,rather wait for a REAL PIC than silly charts this isn't Stereo Review which I hated those charts also..lol
digitalbug30d wrote:
I mean people have the reactionary responses oh its 1500.00 it must suck attitude,rather wait for a REAL PIC than silly charts this isn't Stereo Review which I hated those charts also..lol
Well it does sound suspiciously cheap by anyone's standards.
Well I'm not a wildlife shooter and they are scaled down, but I like the sample images. This lens could actually make me interested in shooting wildlife, I've been put off for so long because of the price of entry.
Paul
