SIGMA 500mm F5.6 DG DN OS | SPORT Review | The Tele We've All Wanted?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

This video is sponsored by Fantom Duffel. Visit store.fantomwallet.com and use code DUSTIN20 to get 20% off

[@cameraprepper7938]

Thank you very much for the text review. I have been waiting for a Lens like this, I had the Sony 200-600, but I sold it because it is too big and heavy for my taste and the IBIS often "jammed" on A7RIV ! I think you can use Sony teleconverters in manual mode !?

[@aryanenzo]

Most wildlife people will not use the 200-600 at 518mm, rather they'll use it at 600mm. In fact many use a 1.4x teleconverter for even more reach. It would've been more helpful to compare the 500mm to the 200-600 at 600mm, and then cropping the 500mm so they have an equivalent framing.

[@KurtisPape]

I own the 200-600mm lens and I have found the lens is sharpest zoomed out a little bit so around 500 - 550mm, I have also met many owners of the lens that have had a similar experience. The truth is the Sony lens is sharp enough especially once you downsize for social media or shoot at F8, also you can add extra contrast and sharpness but... I recently got my first prime lens (a wide angle) and it for sure opened my eyes up to that next level of sharpness and confidence to use the lens wide open, unfortunately for the 200-600mm I don't have confidence to use the lens wide open, the results can be good or bad

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Others have done this comparison, and the IQ results are very close.

[@LtDeadeye]

@Pape I agree. I often use my Sony 100-400 GM to get tele shots. So much so, that I forget I even have a 135mm GM. But when I use my 135, I'm remidend just how amazing it is. My 100-400 isn't even close.

[@vukhuat4251]

What a great lens! I really hope Sigma will make an X-mount version for Fujifilm like the 100-400mm.

[@denisbede3251]

Thats what I am hoping as well. I was thinking why not already offer it for Fuji X-mount, they already have several perfect lenses for X-mount (I personally own 10-18 and 18-50 and they are superb). Maybe Fuji is working on their own tele prime so they asked Sigma to hold the release?!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I can see Sigma doing that. I think this lens is sharp enough to handle 40MP APS-C.

[@lionheart4424]

​@@denisbede3251there is a rumour that Fuji will release their 500mm f5.6 on X mount. So maybe they did not allowed Sigma to have this lens on X-Mount, but it might come in the future.

[@roaldarts7641]

Great reviews as always, they are my benchmark for finding out about new gear. Thanks for your content

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you very much.

[@oriwo99]

The interesting question is how it compares to the new Sony GM 2.8/300mm with the two teleconverters (1x; 2x)? This is considerably more expensive but also more flexible with the two teleconverters, especially if you already own them.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'll definitely revisit my results here when I do manage to get my hands on a 300GM

[@michaellekas27]

excellent review Dustin. Praying it will soon come in the rf mount too

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I know what you're saying. Canon has been so stubborn on this front.

[@PetrKlapper]

The most important test to do for many Sony users - will 500mm Sigma produce more detailed (or at least equal) APS-C crop image than Sony 200-600mm at 600mm on 60MP A7R4/5 shot at some field relevant distance? That's what I'd want to know the most if I ever wanted long tele for wildlife and sport. Plus all those people with 70-200 that just want longer in a smallest package (sometimes) and don't know if they need to carry 200-600 just for 500-600 and crop.

[@youknowwho9247]

Tony Northrup did that test in his review. The Sigma is much sharper at 500mm than the Sony. Cropped to 600mm, it's about the same as the Sony. The big problem with the Sigma though is that it limits max fps to 15. For an a9 series or a1 owner, that's a knockout argument in favour of the Sony lens.

[@gamebuster800]

If you want a smaller package, the 100400GM exists, which everyone seems to have forgotten about

[@PetrKlapper]

@@youknowwho9247 Thanks, I'll check that. 15fps sure is dealbreaker for some, but not for everyone, used to be plenty just a few years ago.

[@PetrKlapper]

@@gamebuster800 100-400GM does exist, but doesn't compete at '500 sharp or 600 zoom-sharp' bracket. And for some things you need at least that.

[@gamebuster800]

@@PetrKlapper Really? The 400mm + crop or 1.4TC is that not-sharp-enough you rather buy a third-party 500mm prime that can never shoot beyond 15fps on current AND future bodies and cannot take teleconverters? I guess that's a use-case, but I don't expect this thing to sell a lot for e-mount.

[@boristahmasian9604]

Thank you Dustin. Any chance you could compare the Sigma to the Tamron 150-500?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I could go back and compare my findings, though I probably won't have an opportunity to do a head to head as I don't have either lens on hand anymore.

[@boristahmasian9604]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you Dustin. I'll look it up on your channel. I do have the 150-500 and was wondering if the quality difference warrants an additional $1,700 spending. My 150-500 was soft when I bought it but a trip to Tamron repair center fixed the issue.

[@jeroenvdw]

I had the Tamron 150-500 and I sold it 2 days ago because on the A7RV you can really notice how soft the image is, on my A7III I didn't have that problem. The image stabilisation and AF isn't great either. With fast moving subjects coming towards you it maybe has a keeper rate of 50%.

[@boristahmasian9604]

@@jeroenvdw Thank you for your reply. I have had a 150-500 for about a year now. The images were soft on my A7RIV from day one. So I did not use it much at all. I finally shipped it back to Tamron for them to check it out. They never reported what they did, but they sent back a perfectly sharpe lens. My guess is that it had a misaligned element causing the soft images. I have it up for sale myself because I got the 50-400 which has a much more useful range for my landscape work. I bought the 150-500 to do some bird and wildlife photograph that never happened. I will sell it and perhaps in the future get the Sony 200-600 which has more reach. No hurry as the longer focal lengths are not necessary for my current work.

[@stanobert3475]

I would love to see this lens for the Fuji X mount. I am going to purchase Sigma 100-400 based on your review of this lens. The 500 5.6 lens would compliment the 100-400 very well, especially due to their compactness and light weight (for telephoto lenses). Thanks for your review!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's a fair point.

[@fromia1]

Excellent review, did you manage to compare the Sigma 500mm with 1.2x crop vs the Sony 200-600mm at 600?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I didn't, but the results would probably still slightly favor the prime lens in sharpness, though with a bit less pixels, obviously

[@youknowwho9247]

​@@DustinAbbottTWITony and Chelsea Northrup have done that test. Their review is essentially a direct comparison between the new Sigma and the Sony zoom. Their verdict is that the Sigma wins massively at 500mm, but by the time you crop it to 600, sharpness between the two is pretty much identical. For real world shooting, I think having the 200-499mm extra range, not capping ones fps and saving 1000 bucks makes the Sony the superior option - unless you know that you'll only ever need exactly 500mm or can't physically carry the heavier zoom.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

@@youknowwho9247 That's fair

[@justinhoward6755]

Were you ever able to test this with an APS-C? I ordered it with an A6700 for a super light birding setup and don't know what to expect yet! 750mm at f/5.6 will be fantastic.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

No, I didn't. But it should work well, I would think.

[@bensal666]

Awsome review Dustin, as usual!! Many thanks!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you.

[@bensal666]

@@DustinAbbottTWIIts very helpfull with a guy like you who seems to be neutral and not "bought" by brands. Keep it up!!!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

@@bensal666 That means lot.

[@bensal666]

@@DustinAbbottTWI i have a suggestion. Compare the Sigma 500 f4 +mc11+sony A1, and compare Sony A1 +Sigma 500 5.6. I my self have the Sigma 500 f4, and im intrested in the difference.

[@AmorLucisPhotography]

Great review - as ever, Dustin! I'm contemplating trading my Sony 200-600mm for this lens for wildlife, and one question I'm having is whether the extra sharpness and half stop of the 500mm prime compensates for the loss of reach with the 200-600mm on the a7R5. If I cropped the 500mm at f5.6 to 600mm equivalent, how would sharpness compare with the 200-600mm at 600mm and f6.3? Any thoughts or intuitions? Cheers.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Image quality would be close. Some of that sharpness advantage is lost when cropping, but the image scaled up is still very close.

[@enolamns]

Thanks for the awesome comparison, the Sony Images for comparison look as if they were shaky due to 1/13? Can't believe it looks so bad and soft in comparison.If that is really the case the Sigma is miles ahead in sharpness.

[@mangoldm]

I almost always shoot my Sony 200-600 stopped down to f/8 at 600mm. Would be curious if a 600mm f/8 prime would be much smaller than this Sigma.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I suspect it would be.

[@gabedamien]

500/5.6 = minimum 89mm front element 600/8 = minimum 75mm front element On paper at least, a 600/8 could definitely be smaller, if front element size is any clue.

[@ScreenFiends]

Seems petty of me but I'd prefer L mount users rather than Leica users. I'm a Lumix user and the brand seems oddly shut out by many KZbinrs, not to mention this can also be used on Sigma's own products too. Sure the big three dominate at the moment but there should also be acknowledgement of other brands in the space, that's how modern brands like Sony (in the mirrorless space) have grown. I'm currently making a comparison video between the Canon R7 and S5II on my other YT channel, the results may be more surprising than you think!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's fair, though the problem is that it is almost universally referred to as Leica L-mount. I am working towards being more disciplined in referring to it as just L-mount, though even that isn't hardly descriptive enough.

[@AdamMuise]

The S5ii is a great camera, truly a hybrid. The sensor is great for late night photography and the autofocus is a force to reckoned with. I really like the computational photography features like multiple exposure and live composite for cityscape shoots. I have to admit though, the Nikon Zf has replaced the niche for everyday street photography and the Leica SL3 for hybrid / BSI / AF needs in L mount. If you can’t afford the latter, the s5ii x remains one of the best video driven cameras on the market.

[@peterchromik6130]

Thanks for the review, good job as always. I'm curious and I believe I'm not the only one, how the lens behaves when paired with an apsc cam. or a full cam. in crop mode since no teleconverters are available. Thanks in advance.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I did shoot with it in crop mode a bit, but understand that shooting in crop mode on something like my a7RV is going to deliver identical image quality; it is just cropping in on what you already see. This lens is easily sharp enough to handle the transition to APS-C.

[@PhotoTrekr]

Excellent review. I have the Sony 200-600 which I like very much. But, I always use it on a tripod. It would be nice to have a long telephoto that's hand holdable.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's what Sigma is hoping for.

[@PhotoTrekr]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Preordered. Look forward to comparing it to the Sony 200-600mm G.

[@wengchi-hung8326]

@@PhotoTrekrhow’s it so far? could you share your thoughts with us?

[@PhotoTrekr]

@@wengchi-hung8326 It took so long for B&H to get one in stock that I lost interest and canceled my preorder.

[@Carl83839A]

Thanks Dustin. You are my most trusted review channel along w the northrups. Cant find better. Thanks again.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you very much.

[@IsawUupThere]

In theory: amazing lens, but 3,2m minimum focus distance is insane. I can think of at least three times this week where that would have been extremely frustrating.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's very true, and can often be a shortcoming of long primes vs zooms that cover the same focal length.

[@Jeo-What]

Thanks for the review. Amazing sharpness off this prime lens. I am already seeing used Sony 200-600mm popping up on the FB Market Place for sale!!!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It is very sharp, for sure.

[@justindeierling2465]

Great video/review! Can I ask what tripod that is??

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Oben Tabletop Tripod shown in video: bhpho.to/3vL8YWy

[@thrallingFRglory]

I’d love to see this tested on the S5 II, not too many videos about the L Mount unfortunately

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I agree. I've considered buying an S5II recently for this reason.

[@thrallingFRglory]

@@DustinAbbottTWIOh please do the do get one! 🙏

[@bladerealm124]

Have you tested the Nikon 600mm f6.3 PF? Can you compare it with the Sigma 500mm? I'm trying to decide which system to invest into and none of these lenses are stocked locally so I'd have to order based on feedback. Budget isn't the biggest factor. I'm more interested in size/weight, image quality, etc. I already have a Nikon ZF with Smallrig grip but I'm sure the handling would be poor with the 600 PF. So I'd likely get a Nikon Z8 to pair with it. With the Sigma 500mm I'd probably pair it with an A7CII, A7RV, or A9III (and maybe ZV-E1 for video).

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Unfortunately I don't have the means of testing Nikon (yet). I am considering investing in a Z8 this year to allow me to do some Nikon testing.

[@anthonyhurren5613]

Thanks Dustin great review as always! I too really hope they make an X mount version if Fuji allow it, it would be an amazing 750mm FF EQ for wildlife photography 🙏. Unless Fuji has a long X mount prime under their sleeve they are finally going to produce after so many years other than the up and coming GFX 500mm. So here is an interesting question Dustin: would you think shooting at 500mm on the A1 and cropping to equivlant 750mm would still resolve better than an X mount version using the XH2 at F5.6 at the equivalent image size baring in mind the diffraction is more noticeable on the pixel dense XH2? It would be an interesting comparison for me as I am a fuji shooter who has been waiting for this type of compact length prime lens for a number of years now. Kind regards Anthony 🙏

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's an interesting theory, but I think this lens is sharp enough that it would probably look better on the X-H2.

[@anthonyhurren5613]

@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks Dustin, brill that’s good to know 👍 as I don’t really want to change systems. Just hope Sigma make an x mount version! 🙏👍 Ant

[@cjoe6908]

Is there an EF mount version of this lens? I know there is none for RF mount.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm afraid not. This is only for mirrorless lenses, and thus far Canon has not opened their RF mount to full frame third party development.

[@jeroenvdw]

It's a great lens for sure, I always had Sigma lenses but they were big and heavy. Replaced almost all of them with native Sony lenses and I couldn't be happier. At the moment I'm like should I buy this by knowing that I can't use teleconverters, am not really future proof if I ever decided on A1 mk2/3/4 or A9III/IV/V etc and if Sony ever makes a lens like this it will be lighter, faster and has full support. Or wait for the Sony 200-600 mk2 in the hope that it will be faster (and maybe a bit lighter.) Or... Go with either a Sony 300, 400 or 600mm prime + 1.4x tc. Tough to decide.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It is a tough decision. There's a lot of good about this lens, but also some liabilities.

[@daviddouglasuk]

Excellent review as always. This lens is very interesting as an upgrade to 200-600 but there are other options Sony 300 F2.8 + 2XTC or even the Z8+600PF would you be able to do a comparison of high grade options for 600mm shooting, without having to go for a 600 F4? I am keen to find the best light weight 600mm option.

[@denisbede3251]

I don't think those are other options... Sony 300 f/2.8 is twice the price without TC, regarding Nikon I would say 400 f/4.5 + 1.4 TC around 4K € is the other option, 600PF being more expensive. But I think - just by seeing the comparison of this Sigma with 200-600G ... it cannot be more sharp so should be the same as Nikon 400PF or 600PF.

[@youknowwho9247]

I don't see how this lens is an upgrade to the Sony 200-600. The only thing the Sigma has going for it is sharpness at exactly 500mm. If you need to crop even just 1.2x to 600mm, the Sony is equally as sharp because there's no need to crop with it (the Northrups have done that test). So with the Sigma, you gain a weight advantage and added sharpness at 500mm, but compared to the Sony you lose the 200-499mm range, a bit of af performance, you significantly drop your fps if you're an a9 series or a1 shooter, and you pay about 50% more. Honestly, unless you know that you only ever need exactly 500mm or physically can't carry the Sony, I don't see any reason whatsoever to buy this Sigma lens.

[@denisbede3251]

@@youknowwho9247 its not an upgrade, its just an alternative. Honestly I have xf 100-400 on fuji now and I never used it on any other focal length than 400mm and I struggle because zoom lenses are soft on the extreme ends of the range. So having a lens thats prime with excellent sharpness and small and compact makes a lot of sense. But I can see that on Sony bodies it brings with it some limitations. I don’t understand the logic behind croping 1.2x to 600mm and loosing sharpness. You can clearly see in this video that the sharpness on 500mm compared to Sony 200-600 on 500mm is much better. And its shown on 100% crop or more. So even if you crop image from Sigma to get to 600mm field of view, the sharpness would be better. The Northrups showed some not very optimized images in their review that were not very comparable imho.

[@nat-lj8kt]

​@@youknowwho9247 sharpness is not the only thing. No vignette. No distortion. Probably much better bokeh (quality, not quantity). Also for sure much less flare & ghosting. Probably better for LOCA as well. Sharpness is just one metric in a lens. I love Sony 50mm gm 1.4. I recently used it on holiday but I know my 50mm GM 1.2 would behave better for flare, bokeh roundness and also LOCA. On the other hand, my Voigtlander 50mm f2 APO would have more contrast in images (which you cannot make look similar by editing) and much nice sunstars but no AF for that night street photography. Everything is a compromise. Even the best.

[@sgpork]

would you have chance to test 300GM?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm on a list, but I can't tell you how quickly that will happen.

[@richardgrant418]

On third party lenses (with full AE/AF) Sony imposes a maximum of 15FPS That limitation aside, would this (or any other 3rd party lens) work with a Sony teleconverter?

[@timothysteenwyk2978]

@8:45

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The short answer is no.

[@R.Hogarth]

I would be interested in it if it was available in a Nikon Z Mount, but I can't think of any Sigma lenses off the top of my head in the Z Mount. It would be a nice addition to my Z8.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I do think you'll see more Sigma lenses coming to Nikon Z in the next year

[@AdamMuise]

The z 600mm PF is well worth saving up for

[@sjaakcoppens1000]

Like the lens very much; could be my (very) long lens on a6700. However still no possibility to rent it at “my” store. AND: question Why would sigma not make a speedbooster so that makes the lens for the APSC sensor cameras two lenses: > one with extra reach 750mm > one with gaining 1 stop light at 500mm. In that way it’s price is more “bang for the buck”.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Interesting thoughts.

[@iransirijillo]

I wish I waited for this lens, I purchased the GM300 with 2x TC instead which I love but my wallet is still hurting and I’m considering “downgrading” to save some money . Thoughts ?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's always a challenge when you have spent big money on a lens, though you have one of the most special lenses on the platform. It would be nice if you could rent the Sigma and see if it met your needs before making such a huge move.

[@longrider9551]

Mr A any chance you can try it on a 6700?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Afraid not. I don't have access to an a6700 right now and have already had to send the Sigma back.

[@longrider9551]

@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you sir. I only asked I have two setups my a9 with a 600 F4 and I am building a second setup that's really small and light with the 6700. Currently I use the 100 to 400 but I was thinking this might be a nice alternative. I'll try renting one. Have a great day!

[@robertbuckley7107]

I use this lens on my Sony a6700..... All I can say is it's just a dream to use, 750mm at an effective f5.6. They pair beautifully together. IQ, IS and image quality is simply outstanding. If you're on the fence.... Don't be, just buy it you won't be disappointed, it's quality glass !! 👍

[@longrider9551]

@@robertbuckley7107 I rented it and loved it

[@AdamMuise]

Did you use this lens on the A1 or A9iii?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

On the A1, yes. I did basically all of my review outside of the optical tests on it.

[@TheTensecondz]

I wish Tamron will introduce a competing lens with better features like programmable controls.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Tamron doesn't really have track record of making long telephoto primes. Maybe that will change in the future, but Sony's limitations on third party lenses make producing a lens like this an uphill battle.

[@rodrigomartin-hidalgo1592]

Anyone knows the brand of the tripod ? Thanks!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Oben Tabletop Tripod shown in video: bhpho.to/3vL8YWy

[@heidismerek4163]

Primes are always priced higher than zooms. If you take a look at primes from the camera manufacturer, they are a lot more money. This prime would be good on a camera like the Sony a7IV, as you wouldn’t be crippled by fps. I bought the Sony A1 for the fps, so to put this prime on that camera would be pointless in my opinion. The price makes it tempting though.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Fair enough.

[@heidismerek4163]

Love your reviews, too bad Sony puts those limitations on third party lenses.

[@PrimalShutter]

This lens would be amazing for fuji

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Agreed.

[@thinkingape7655]

Dustin, you’re balancing a glass of beer on your head. 😉 (the photo in your background)… but seriously, I enjoy and appreciate your many great reviews. Just thought your background was a bit funny.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's a cup of tea, but fair enough ;)

[@JavierMorenoX]

I, a Sony heavy photography consumer, am pretty unhappy about this shortsightness. It is doubtful, at least, that not allowing TC or proper speed will benefit Sony at all. How many of the potential super tele primes would go for anything not Sony? Negligible. How many would buy this fantastic Sigma product to use in a great combo with the Sony cameras and feel great about it? Quite a few. Now if you buy Sigmas product and later hate the shortcomings of its potential, part of the disgust will affect out Sony perception. I am very sorry to see this littleminds approach.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It is unfortunate, and becoming more and more of an issue as more excellent third party telephoto lenses are released.

[@18yearsoldnot]

I just sold my Nikon gear but I still have a sigma fp 😮

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Nice

[@maxsr3236]

This lens would be great for a 40 megapixel APSC camera, if only Sony made one.

[@shang-hsienyang1284]

It's a shame that even though the autofocus and video capabilities are improved, the resolution and fps of the latest a6700 are barely improved compared to the 2014 a6000.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

As an owner of a 40MP Fuji camera, I actually think that 40MP may be too high for APS-C with current technology. It's the first sensor I've used where I actually find many lenses don't perform well on it.

[@MarkusGebhard]

Lets hope Sony will release something like this lens in the near future. I don't want to miss 30fps again.

[@taylorhickman84]

yeah I've been wanting to purchase the 200-600, but holding out hoping for a mark ii

[@MarkusGebhard]

@@taylorhickman84 you might have to wait for several years though. I'd just get a used 200-600 for time being. It is an awesome lens. Sharp, versatile and affordable. Autofocus is great too!

[@gamebuster800]

@@taylorhickman84 The 200-600 is pretty great value though, no need to wait IMO

[@taylorhickman84]

@@MarkusGebhard I rented one for a week and had a great time with it, just wish it would fit in my Wandrd camera bag or my Nanuk carry-on.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

A lens like this from Sony would do very well. Full TC support, full burst rate, and they would probably put multiple AF motors in it so focus would be even faster. It would probably also be more expensive, though.

[@mrmonday42]

It could have been even smaller if it wasn't designed to use teleconverters. As a Sony shooter I wish it had been designed for use without TC.

[@medicineman4040]

It is designed for TC use, just not with Sony. The limitation is in the Sony BIOS. Sony could open up a few lines of code and wallah it would be TC do'able. I'm good with it though; I used the D500+500PF combo for 1.5 years and never put a TC on it. Also, I'm buying this lens for the A7iv and it is limited at 10fps. So for my usage the limitations are moot. Speaking of the Nikon 500PF, I also had the 300PF. Now I'm hoping Sigma will issue a 300mm sister to this 500/5.6.

[@mrmonday42]

​@@medicineman4040 You clearly didn't read my comment carefully. I was saying that I wish it had not been designed for use with a TC because the lens could be significantly more compact, and as Sony users it not having TC support wouldn't effect us.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I see your point, but that would mean alienating all of the L-mount users that do have teleconverter options.

[@mrmonday42]

@@DustinAbbottTWI True, I wonder what Sigma's sales numbers are for L mount vs E mount.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

@@mrmonday42 I'll have to ask my Sigma contact sometime if they know those figures.

[@southsun1149]

Hope Sony can make a similar lens.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

agreed

[@un0591]

i never thought they going to make this one.......lol

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It did take a while. I just wish that it wasn't limited in a few key areas by Sony!

[@frostybe3r]

Honestly, ditching my 200-600 for this due to the size and weight difference… As always, good review but your images need work.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Fair enough. My images need work in what way? Doing reviews is not like owning a lens; you've got a brief window to do reviews in, and because I'm constantly doing reviews, I can't always travel to exotic locations where subjects are readily available. Try doing 100+ lens reviews a year and then get back to me.

[@frostybe3r]

@@DustinAbbottTWI What would be helpful is a bokeh comparison between the 500 5.6 and 200-600, at the same distant, 500 vs 600mm, I don’t think anyone cares about the 200-600 at 500mm.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

No one? Most people that I know prefer apples to apples comparisons.

[@Uninfluenceable]

$3000 for an F5.6 (especially from Sigma) seems excessive to me. Maybe if it was coming from Canon or Nikon I would expect that kind of pricing, but not from Sigma. Considering F5.6 is only 1/3rd of a stop brighter than the Sony 600mm F6.3 (with is a 1/3rd cheaper), I just don't see the value in this. I suppose the weight is a benefit, but then again the Canon RF100-500 is the exact same weight and only 2/3rd of a stop darker (1/3rd darker at 472mm), but with the added benefit of a much more useful 5x zoom range. I think $1750 would have been a more appropriate price for this lens.

[@gamebuster800]

and even then, if weight and size is an issue, the 100400GM exists! You can even put an 1.4TC on it. You only buy this Sigma for the sharpness. One must be really hot for pixel peeping to get this lens.

[@dannyli9424]

It's still $600 cheaper than the old Nikon 500 F5.6 PF, so this is cheap in comparison.

[@timothysteenwyk2978]

Not to mention a minimum focus distance of 10ft! This lens has a very small working window if you’re trying to fill the frame

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The price point is certainly open for debate, though, to be fair, it is half the price of Sigma's 500mm F4.

[@johnkasianowicz6536]

@@gamebuster800Tele converters usually degrade the image quality of a lens.

[@Mr09260]

Nikon already has 2 ultra light Z 400 f4.5 S and 600 f6.3 s PF Prime Lenses and Canon and Sony dont , so Canon will have to wait as I dont see their far lagging behind RF lenses will ever get one to their frustrated customers anytime soon

[@Mr09260]

I see that this Lens will only be able to get to 15 FPS even on an A1 or A9 >> what a pity >> The 2 Nikon lenses can do 20 FPS and 60 and 120 FPS further extending and exposing how far behind Canon and Sony are now behind with their offerings when compared to the leading Z Mirrorless System

[@shang-hsienyang1284]

Where's Nikon's 300mm f/2.8, which should be the staple pro lens? Where's the 35mm f/1.2 or f/1.4? 70-300mm? 70-200mm f/4? No? Sony users are happy with the 200-600mm, which based on tests autofocus as fast as the Nikon 600mm f/4 and twice as fast as the 180-200. Nobody needs the Z 400mm prime or 600mm when Nikon's own 180-600 and 100-400 are up to the task. The 800mm prime offers good performance for the money. However, it's time Nikon makes a 10-24mm f/4 or a 12-24mm f/2.8, 14mm, 24mm, 28mm, 35mm f/1.4 primes.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

@Mr09260 - it seems like you are cherry picking here. That limitation in on a third party lens, so it proves nothing about Nikon vs Sony in terms of their systems. I don't think anyone is arguing that Nikon's AF is as good as Sony's to this point. There are some definite strengths about Nikon's Z mount approach, but calling it "leading" is, well, misleading. That's not true from a commercial or critical perspective.

[@firpofutbol]

Too expensive for it being an f5.6. I am about value and this doesn't beat the Tamron 150-500mm which I got for a third of the price.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I would say that is the biggest knock against it. To be fair, it is half the price of Sigma's F4 version, but I was surprised that it was priced so much higher than the zooms.

[@timothysteenwyk2978]

If shopping used, you could buy the Tamron lens and an a7iv body to put it on for less than the cost of the Sigma. The zoom may be slightly less sharp, but it’d be infinitely more versatile in most conditions

[@RichardLarssen]

Not for Sony at least, 15 FPS. And F/5.6, no way.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's really unfortunate for a lens like this that Sony cripples it, particularly considering that Sony doesn't offer a direct alternatives.

[@gamebuster800]

I just don't understand why it exists. It is more expensive than a Sony 100-400 and 200-600, while you get less features.

[@Vantrakter]

It's more than twice as expensive here (Sweden) as the 200-600. 17500SEK vs 38000SEK. But it looks like a nice lens, a fair bit ligther than the Sony, a third of a stop faster @ 500mm. Easier to hold up and shoot with for extended periods of time, if not any more convenient to carry really. I'd be interested were it priced in the same region as the 200-600. Welladay..

[@OscarAbarcaChinchilla]

It's sharper, better sealed than the 100-400 external zoom, better image stabilization and lighter...

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The price point can be debated, but I'm not sure how think it has less features. It has more features then either of those lenses.

[@Carl83839A]

Please do not let the cat you live with run around ourside on his/her own. Its too dangerous out there.