Good value of money (of course can not compared with the L lens but alot better than the Cosina 400mm that I used before)

Heavy, blur photo in bad weather

I just bought the lens well used from a private seller at £230 (around $378 at current exchange) and tried tens shot with my Canon 20D. The photos at 170mm is quite good while 500mm is well acceptable. I picked a pine branch around 15m away at F76.3 and F7.2 and still see the spider web very clearly in hand-keep mode.

I, however, believed using tripod or monopod is a must to avoide handshaking as this is truly heavy monster. Without tripod/monopod or other supporting tool you can not make more than a few shots continuously.

Given that outdoor/wild life shooting is not something regularly and only are carried out in good weather, I still recommend to buy this lens as it is only 1/3 of the payment I paid for my Canon 300mm L USM and photo, in some certain conditions, are acceptable. Should the potential photographer is less than 170cm and 60kg weight he.she should think twice before going ahead due to its heavy weight.

Customer Service

None

Similar Products Used:

Cosina 400mm, Canon 300mm L USM

Sharp images, reasonable price

Very unforgiving of less-than-perfect technique, zoom creep if the lens is pointed downward, CA in certain situations with overexposed or very bright background with darker foreground objects.

My experience has been a bit different than most others here, as I find this lens to produce very sharp images. I use it on a Nikon D70, and shoot RAW files. I've shot mostly in the focal length range of 400mm to 500mm, still good and sharp.

It does suffer from chromatic aberration (CA) in high-contrast situations of very bright (overexposed) backgrounds with darker foreground objects, had that happen when shooting birds in trees a few times, but under most conditions, CA is negligible-to-non existent. I've used this lens mainly for nature stuff, but have also shot a couple college football games with it, and it worked great for that, sharp, great contrast, no CA.

It does demand that your technique be almost flawless. It definitely requires a sturdy tripod or monopod and ideally an f/stop in the range or f/8 to f/11 for the sharpest results. For the money, I am very happy with this lens.

Zoom range, quite reasonable image quality, price - it includes a tripod ring, a hood and a carry case.

No zoom lock, filter size, though mine (used) came with a uv filter, noisy focus.

This is a good lens for what it is - a "consumer zoom". You would have to spend a lot more money to get significantly better image quality such as provided by a Canon L zoom such as the 100-400 L. It can be hand held with an appropriately high shutter speed but I find its best used with some sort of support, even if its a monopod. I find I get the best images with the lens mounted on a sturdy tripod, stopped down a bit and using a remote shutter release. I use it on my Canon DSLRs but haven't used it on my film bodies.

Customer Service

Not needed

Similar Products Used:

Canon 70-200 f/2.8L with 1.4x teleconverter, Canon 70-300 IS

None

not capable of producing a sharp image

Useless lens. This is my second attempt to "save" money on a non-nikon lens and it has been a complete waste. I have shot with this lens on a tripod, mirror lock-up and remote trigger and still can not get an image I would even consider offering for sale.

Customer Service

N/A

Similar Products Used:

Nikon 2.8 70-200mm VR

Price (for a new lens). Its a budget means of getting closer to sporting events, but not a professionals lens.

It takes great photos for postcard size prints, even up to 10x12.

Looks the business and if you accept the limitations, you can work around them. In this vein, try renting a variety of lenses before committing to buying one.

Judging from the limited successes I've had, this lens does well in photographing sports events (fast cars/F1, hockey, etc). Not so great for wildlife, unless there is full sun (which kind of defeats the purpose).

No flare that I've ever noticed (I've never really experimented much). Just use the supplied lens hood. I would however reccomend coating the inner (plastic) surface of the hood with black felt.

Price: You may get a better match with a new 100-300 lens and a second hand 500mm prime with an adapter. But you will need dedicated research and reading up on blogs to find lenses that meets your requirements.

Soft focus when aperture wide open. Admittedly, I have gone as far as using this lens on a bean bag with a remote release (never a tripod) but as far as I've been able to determine even in extremely bright sunny weather, stopped down and at 1/000th second exposure, you still get soft images.

Does not enhance the advantages offered by high res (8MP+) digital photography at anything beyond 300mm.

"Floppy" lens. It does wobble about a bit when the tube is extended. I've never fiddled to see if that significantly alters the focus.

Despite being a heavy monster, it feels plasticky. You get what you pay for.

Hopeless as a macro lens (1.5m? focal length)

I don't think this should be your first zoom lens.

Chromatic abberation abounds (at least Photoshop can fix this)

Some vignetting noticeable at long reach (500mm). Recommend using only a UV or only a circular polariser at any one time.

Using a 1.4x image extender is a hopeless excercise with this lens; don't even consider it.

Poor storage case design. Yes, you get a bag with the lens, but it's a tube (lens fits in one end of tube and you slide the lens out). I forget about the lens creep so often that I have had to put a label on the lens cap to warn me when I remove it from it's bag. If you try remove it vertically, if frequently creeps unexpectedly from 170mm to 500mm in a splitsecond. Hopeless for astrophotography with that kind of creep!

Dust specks are a problem inside the lens now. I'll have to take the lens apart to clean it. I have not had any other experience to say if it's a poor design, or if I've been unrealistic in expecting it to stand up to the beaten tracks that I travel.

Focus is loud and mechanical. Loud enough to scare timid wildlife subjects a couple of meters away. About as loud as rubbing your hands together quickly.

I've been dissapointed with this lens from the time I've spent going from amateur beginner photographer to semi-pro/expert. I bought it a few months after my first SLR: a film Canon Rebel 2000 (EOS 300)

It's never really produced sharp images at anything beyond 400mm. I've mainly used it for wildlife photography, originally on the Rebel 2000, then film Canon EOS30, printing to as large as A5 (at most). After I upgraded to a 20D, I really noticed the shortcomings of the lens: softness that not even Photoshop can fix.

The UV protective lens for the Sigma was not that expensive, but the circular polariser was quite expensive. Not terribly difficult to find lens filters: I phoned around in an afternoon and found some.

I've never really had focussing issues on any of the Canon cameras I've used. I simply set the focus to centrepoint and away it goes, with minimal hunting. Maybe I got lucky? Tracking focus is -however- unrelaible.

Customer Service

Have never sent it in. - No comment.

Similar Products Used:

Recently I bought the Canon 100-400L IS USM lens. This lens is fabulous on the 20D reduced sensor size. Every bit as sharp as a L series lens claims to be. Understated genius in design. Sure, the L lens broke the bank at $1800 (I had to ship it in :s, but no more fuzzy details in images. For me, it is quite important to be able to creatively crop a poorly framed image at (say) 400mm and not have to really worry about softness ruining the resulting crop. I've managed to take some pretty amazing hand-held images in next to no light thanks to the image stabiliser. Is this lens three times better than the Sigma? Yes. If you can find one second hand for $800, then go for this rather! The L lens has made the Sigma obsolete overnight and Iit is now being sold.

My first zoom is an early 70-300mm EFII Canon lens which is much sharper in the 170-300 range compared to the Sigma lens. I will also suggest that with a high quality good lens extender (1.4x or 2x) on the 300mm zoom, I can get about as sharp an image as the Sigma lens (but with much less light entering the lens and using a 20D smaller-than-35mm CCD)

Reliability
Price

Image Quality
Focusing

This lens has been a big disappointment. I have owned this lens for 5 years and have yet to take a photo that I would consider sharp. Even stopped down, tripod mounted, mirror locked up with cable release still will not produce a sharp image. I would not consider this lens usable at 500 mm. Acceptable soft images can be achieved around 450 mm.

Outside of bright, sunny days I could only rarely use the autofocus. It is always slow and regularly hunts. The micro servo motor is noisy. Manual focus is made difficult due to the sensitivity of the focusing ring.

When extended out past 300mm there is significant wobble in the barrel (at least 1/8"). Color and contrast are just OK. I have had no problems with flare. Reliability has been excellent.

This lens is not recommended for professional photgraphers or discriminating enthusiasts. Images taken with this lens may be suitable for low resolution web or newsprint. However, the softness of this lens is very apparent in high resolution web and printed images over 4x6. This is a good lens for taking snapshots of the kids playing outdoor sports. However, once you enlarge the images to 8X10 or larger, the optical shortcomings are evident.

Other options are the Sigma 50-500 ($1,000), Tamron 200-500 ($900) and Canon 100-400 IS L ($1,400). I do not have any experience with the Sigma or Tamron, but the Canon is outstanding. The $1,400 price tag was offset by the $450 trade-in on the my Sigma 170-500.

Customer Service

None

Similar Products Used:

Canon 100-400 IS L

Cheap

Slow aperture, Heavy (all refracters are heavy so its not really a weakness), slow and noisy focus.

If you are expecting Sharp Clear crisp images then this is not the lens for you. It is somewhat soft throughout the zoom range but is still sharp enough to not be classified junk. Its clearly what you get for what you paided, a okay Super Telephoto for some crazy price. Its heavy, but you cant expect much from a defracter that goes up to such a focal length. Unless your going for a Reflecter (which is worse in terms of sharpness and functionality) then this is your best choice. The softness could be fixed using an USM in photoshop but then it still cant replace the sharpness from a Proffessional lens. I brought this because i needed a cheap lens with okay sharpness with a long reach since i wanted to take a few pictures of the moon. You can see the craters large and clear with this so it did its job well. There wasnt much flare (tested on a 350D) while using a MC UV0 Filter but then my version is the DG version with better coating. The focus is slow and noisy which is inoying when you want to keep quite but it is quite stupid bringing quite a big heavy consumer lens to a formal place where you can just crop from a image taken with a better quality lens. Personally if you want a cheap lens that could reach up to 500mm i would recommend the Sigma 50-500 f4-6.3 EX, that has a MUCH faster and a WAY more quite focus as well as being alot sharper. The removable tripod colour is well placed and well designed and it comes with a really good soft padded case for it. Kudos Sigma for including that.

Similar Products Used:

EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM
Sigma 50-500 f4-6.3 EX

Price. 500mm zoom lens. It does take great pictures. It works well on my S3. It made me buy a better tripod which has wroked great with other equipment I have. It is a good budget lens that doesn't feel budget and performs better than you might think. It is one of the non Nikon Lens that I really like.

Zoom crrep, not that big of an issue, but put a lock on the thing (Sigma). I hate taking the thing of my tripod and hearing the lens slam down towards the ground as it slides out. I forget sometimes it likes to creep. This has never hurt the lens but the sound sure can unerve you. The filter size makes finding filters a job and when you do the price is a little stunning. I got a good uv filter just for protection and paid over 120 for it. I looked at the polarizer but figured I would sve the money for another lens, it was that expensive.

You probably want find anotther 500mm that works was well for the price, it works well for all the limitations you have read in other reviews. I have found a tripod is mandatory for use with this lens, a good tripod, heavy. It has lens creep which really is not that to much of an issue. I use it mainly on my S3. I have had no problems witht the images using this combanation. This is only when i have it on the tripod. The lens is big but not big, It can get heavy lugging it around on the tripod. It is not the fastes focusing lens but using a 400vr also I can say that lens is not a speed demon either. I think getting into these zoom ranges and what they are used for by most the AF speed is something we live with. I just look at it as a trade off for being able to reach out and this lens will reach out.

I used it once at a wakeboarding event. I placed the tripod where I had a good view of the ramp and did get some great photographs, not alot, but enough that I was pleased with the perfermance of the lens. I could not have got these shots with any other lens because of the distance. So it did what I bought it for. I have not used it on my D200 and most likley will not becasue of reported issues with this camera and Sigma Lens.

If you want to get in this range and do not want to break the bank, this lens will do the job. Once you know the limitations it really is a great lens for a non Nikon lens. I know everyone praises good nikon glass, me included, but there some other options that work when you find them and for a alot less. I am a Nikon dude all the way, but I like to save some money to. I bought this lens for a specific purpose, not everyday use. It is a tool that works when I need it. .

Similar Products Used:

80-400vr, love it.

Crisp Sharp images. Auto Focus is not as slow as some seem to think. It might be a System thing more than a lens issue.

Heavy, Zoom Creap. No Filters. Lens hood is soft plastic.

Good Price and product. It is my third Sigma lens. Have used this lens on a Canon EOS ELANIIe and now mostly on a Digital Rebal xt. I Wish I could Find a 19 to 200 that was this good.

Customer Service

Great, They are retunning it to work better with my Digital systems.

Similar Products Used:

Canon 70-200 and a couple of nikor lens.

Price. Good optics for the money

Zoom creep. Tripod is very unbalanced when at 500 mm zoom setting and this therefore hard to adjust vertically, but more likely is that I probably have a lousy tripod.

This lens is a great value for the money. I am not a professional photographer; I just love to take pictures. Therefore I need to get the most value for my money since I am on a modest budget, and this lens gives me exactly that. Using this lens at its 500 mm setting on a Nikon D100 Digital Camera, I took the most beautiful shot of a Tiger Swallow Tail butterfly on a thistle plant. The smaller image size results in an effective zoom of approximately 750 mm. The color was absolutely superb and the focus was sharp. I have also taken many moon shots and achieved very good results. Picture stat’s follow. Focal Length: 500 mm F-Number: F/6.3 Exposure Time: 1/90 sec Metering Mode: Pattern Exposure Program: Normal Exposure Compensation: -1 step So if you want a good quality zoom lens for a modest price, this lens will fill that niche perfectly.

Customer Service

Excellent

Similar Products Used:

None