| Author: | | New Member Registered: April, 2019 Posts: 5
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: September 6, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $99.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | sharp, easy focus, tripod mount | | Cons: | low contrast | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 7
Value: 8
Camera Used: sony ilce 5000
New Or Used: Used
| |
becuz of rave reviews about this lens i bought an "excellent" copy from a well known georgia based used equipment seller. every modern sigma i bought disappointed me. however i had a 30 year old 35-70 mm zoom in m42 which was actually good.
i am surprised that the 600 mm is quite usable. my version FD mount. it seems back in the day sigma was a reputable lens manufacturer, vintage glass indeed.
i recommend this lens. i use with 2x tele converter for moon shots. not as good IQ as canon 500 mm but very close. build quality is high. as usual you MUST use a lens shade, high shutter speeds and a tripod.
i'll tell you true, instead of sakar or quantaray 500 mm get this one instead.
| | | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2011 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 982 | | Review Date: July 17, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Possible great sharpness and contrast, long focus throw | | Cons: | Noticeable hot spot, possible softness | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: Various
New Or Used: Used
| |
I've owned three Sigma 600mm mirrors over the years. The best one was the first one I bought back in 1983. The worst was one I bought a few years ago, probably one made fairly late in the product run. Then I bought another just a couple of weeks ago, which is most likely the oldest of the bunch. Here's how to tell them apart, more or less:
The oldest of the Sigma 600mm mirrors has a chromed metal handle used for inserting and removing the metal tray that holds the rear filter. All later designs used a plastic handle/tray for holding this filter.
The one I bought a couple weeks ago has this chromed metal handle. The early 600s are physically smaller than later ones. Mine has an 84mm filter thread size. The later ones are 86mm. Early mirrors also have a gloss black enamel finish. I suspect the gloss black finish remained standard until the mid-1980s, at which time you saw this mirror appear in a variety of different colors, from white to OD green. I own a fairly late one that has a dark matte gray finish.
Optically, these mirrors have much more variability than I'd like to see. The one I bought back in 1983 was in Canon FD mount and was an outstanding performer. All the shots I have from it are on slides, so I have no digital images to show it off. But it was a great lens. The one I bought a few years ago is in Canon EOS mount -- a rather uncommon version. It performs poorly, exhibiting a pronounced double image. The optics are perfectly clean, but there is an obvious misalignment somewhere. The one I bought a couple weeks ago is a good optic. Not as great as the one I had back in the 80s, but it is a decent enough lens. Its images show some haze however, so I shined a strong light source through it and found that at least one and maybe more surfaces to be quite cloudy. Once this lens is properly cleaned, it may rival the one I bought in 1983 in sharpness. One can hope, at least! As for the one that shows a double image, I'm thinking about taking it to a camera repair facility and see if there's anything they can do for it.
I can give a cautionary "buy" recommendation for this lens -- only if the seller has a return policy. Because of its focal length, when you try it out, use a good, stout tripod and a remote release or the self timer to reduce the chance of camera shake. Also, for evaluating sharpness, I recommend you select stationary subjects and not moving ones. Try the lens out on subjects both near and far.
Except for the first image, showing the way the outfit looks when it was purchased new, all the others are duplicates from Kodachrome slides, mostly Kodachrome.
A 100% crop from the above image:
 | | | | | New Member Registered: August, 2015 Location: Stockholm Posts: 15 | | Review Date: November 3, 2015 | Not Recommended | Price: $150.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Reach, compact | | Cons: | fixed aperture | | Sharpness: 6
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 7
Value: 6
| |
I got this one because I wanted to try a mirror lens. 600mm is quite a reach but the lack of aperture and very thin DOF makes it is quite a challange, especially handheld. It can, under the right circumstances give you great pictures that doesn't require much PP but mostly it does not. It has smooth focus with long throw but I would be benefit from a bit more resistance as just a little twitch throws the focus off.
Walking around in the city a sunny day, taking pictures of people is great with this lens. Partly because of its reach but mostly because its compact and does not draw attention like a big tele-lens would do.
Taken about 5 meters away:
The classic doughnut effect:
 | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: April, 2011 Location: Lost in translation ... Posts: 18,076 | | Review Date: April 29, 2012 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | 600mm FL, compact size of a mirror lens, good build, PK mount | | Cons: | f8 constant, usual defects of a mirror ... | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 8
| |
Bonjour,
I purchased this Sigma over a year ago and it came in excellent shape in its original case with the filters as well.
I have had some fun with the "dough nut" shaped bokeh. The "macro" function is not good, so forget this aspect IMHO.
Salut, John le Frog
 | | | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: February, 2010 Location: Blunsdon,Wiltshire, UK Posts: 1,500
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 21, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $150.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Cheap ,Good for Moon photography | | Cons: | Difficult to focus | | Sharpness: 6
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 5
Handling: 5
Value: 6
New Or Used: New
| |
I purchased this really just to see what mirror lenses were like to use.
The big focusing ring on the lens is quite difficult to use .
Also needs to be on a sturdy tripod for best results.
Overall good fun.
Here are a few pictures taken using it.
 Lufthansa Airliner by Gary Chalker, on Flickr
Sigma 600mm with a 3X Vivitar converter.
 The Moon 14/03/11 by Gary Chalker, on Flickr
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: February, 2008 Location: Hawkesbury Posts: 1,896
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 25, 2008 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Punchy images with good colour, robust design | | Cons: | Usual mirror lens failings, focus ring needs finer adjustment | |
This is a lens for using in brightly lit, open environments or with an enormous flash unit.
I have been able to obtain good images of wading birds and birds in flight so long as I set a K10D to shutter speeds greater than 1/750, turn on SR with the focal length set to 700 or 800mm and manually expose with trial and error. The K10D will over expose using an auto setting with this mirror lens.
If you need to shoot slower shutter speeds, count on using the heaviest tripod you can lay your hands on or at least use the 2 second shutter delay.
If you want to shoot hand held, use your best brace position and you can get about a 70% hit rate at 1/1000 or about 90% at 1/1500.
I find that my copy of the lens works well at about 400iso. I don't gain much resolution by going lower but certainly start loosing quality by pushing beyond 800iso. I am looking forward to trying it out with a K20D!
The rear filter caddy on the Sigma is a neat design and I'm just hanging to find somewhere bright enough that I need to use a dimming filter.
One good thing about the 600mm focal length at f8 is that out of focus highlights easily become so out of focus that they blur out altogether barely registering as a donut.
A feature of this lens is close focusing. Using this feature can lead to some bizarre visual effects. With this lens, the camera CAN lie!
On K20D
I have now used this lens on K20D and I think I have found its resolving limit (back around 6-10 mp) but the higher usable shutter speeds mean hand held shooting is easier. ISO 1600 seems OK or 800 if I want to crop.
| | |
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
