https://www.rogerandpatdelaharpe.com/Blog/Sigma-500mm-F56-DG-DN-OS-Excellent-Value
We’d been commissioned to shoot some stills and video for Mashatu, but we had the good fortune to be able to spend a few extra days there shooting wildlife and landscapes. It seemed like a fabulous time to put the Sigma through its paces, especially shooting video when coupled to my recently acquired Sony ZV-E1. Not that we ignored stills – the resolving power of the 50Mp Sony A1 would certainly highlight any problem with image quality.
The first thing that struck us was the size and weight. As I said, we have been used to shooting with 600mm f4 lenses and yes, this is 500mm and “only” a 5,6 lens but I was still expecting something approaching the 600 behemoths that we’d used in the past. Measuring just 120mm X 310mm with the lens hood fitted and weighing just over 1,3kg it’s not much bigger than Sigma’s 70 – 200 f2,8 and weighs about the same.
I used the lens mainly on my Sony A1 for stills and on the ZV-E1 mainly for video and in both cases it was a joy to use. Hand holding on the A1 worked a treat, the OS working well with the camera, the AF blisteringly fast. As long as the camera was mounted on a video head (or bean bag) shooting video with the ZV-E1 was also excellent, the animal and bird eye focus working superbly. Trying to shoot hand held with a lens this long without a viewfinder (the ZV-E1 only has a LCD screen) was not ideal for either stills or video as it was very difficult to locate the subject and keep things steady using the LCD screen. Of course this has nothing to do with the lens but it’s something that popped up while shooting.
Image quality? Well! It’s one of the sharpest lenses I have ever used and colour and contrast are right on the money. It’s build quality seems excellent and the focussing and aperture rings (aperture ring can be de-clicked) have a lovely smooth “feel” to them.
So, if you’re in the market for a long prime lens, I would seriously have a look at the Sigma 500mm F5.6 DG DN OS. It’s a bit longer and slower than a 400 f2,8 and a bit shorter and slower that a 600 f4. BUT! It costs a fraction of the price of the 400s and 600s, and delivers spectacular results. Makes one think…
