| Author: | | New Member Registered: May, 2023 Posts: 6 | | Review Date: November 18, 2023 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Length | | Cons: | Weight | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Handling: 4
Camera Used: Panasonic and Olympus MFT
Autofocus: 2
New Or Used: Used
| |
Bigma - I have the "for Olympus 4/3" fit "EX Sigma 50-500mm F4-6.3 APO DG HSM" and not it will not fit on the Pentax (because Sigma fitted it with a permanent 4/3 adapter), it is adapted to MFT with DMW-MA1. I actually have two of them. One is broken with a strip lead off which means neither the AF not the aperture works, spares. The other is a "good" copy. Because it was built for these systems only the AF works imperfectly (the AF motors are old school), everything else feeds through, the lens is recognised, the aperture automated and corrections applied. Nearest modern Sigma range would be Sport, or Art.
No, this particular lens will not fit the Pentax. I believe the original Bigma was built for Olympus 4/3 (4/3 sensor with mirror) c.2003. All lenses for that system can be properly adapted electronically to MFT. Which is why I got them, at the time there was nothing close to their length that would fit. But it is the same lens discussed here.
Because it is using only the centre of its image circle it is incredibly sharp, Leica sharp. It is not best at the wide end. The wide end is for finding the subject. It is probably best from 200 to ~490mm. It likes to be stopped down to f/8-f/11
The AF is poor. The camera does the focusing and it was designed for the old Olympus E-series. On modern MFT it will focus like a coffee grinder which will get it ballpark and then MF.
Wildlife lens, yes. Long distance, no. The furthest I have used it about 1 kilometre where inevitably considerable environmental distance blur and heat distortion (air lensing). It is far happier under 100 metres. It is good for Moon too. Always tripod, it is too heavy to hold still even with camera body stabilisation.
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: July, 2013 Posts: 2
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 5, 2022 | Recommended | Price: $1,000.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Great build quality, very decent optics | | Cons: | It's a handful; slow aperture | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 4
Value: 9
Camera Used: K70, K50
Autofocus: 6
New Or Used: New
| |
Bought this lens many years ago, as my first big commitment to going digital. It was simply the only way to get super telephoto capability at a reasonable price. I also bought the compatible 1.4X converter at the same time.
I'm completely happy with the Bigma. It provides superb results, considering the zoom range and price. It pretty much loses autofocus capability with the converter, but since you're using 500 to 700mm, autofocus probably isn't your main concern. It's not a wildlife lens, unless your wildlife doesn't move around much and poses in perfect daylight conditions.
I wouldn't have considered a lens this slow back in my film days, but with the ISO's typically used in digital photography, this lens becomes very practical. One caveat - you need to practice to become proficient with it. It's quirky - it grows to about twice its nominal length at the long end of the range.
Reviews rating this lens as a "1" in sharpness are ridiculous, and yes, I have very sharp prime glass in my possession to judge the relative sharpness of the Bigma. Misinformation, plain and simple.
| | | | | New Member Registered: April, 2015 Posts: 11 | | Review Date: August 30, 2019 | Not Recommended | Price: $550.00
| Rating: 1 |
| Pros: | 10x zoom | | Cons: | Poor image quality. | | Sharpness: 1
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 7
Value: 1
Camera Used: K-30
Autofocus: 6
New Or Used: Used
| |
Poor image quality. At 100mm, even the cheap DA 50-200mm lens performs better (see here). At 200mm and 220mm, even the old Soligor 70-220mm f/3.5 Macro performs better (see here). And at 400mm, even Soligor 400mm f/6.3 performs much better (see here and here). Except the autofocus, there is hardly anything to like about this lens.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: July, 2012 Location: Perth, Australia Posts: 42
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 1, 2017 | Recommended | Price: $200.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Wide focal range jack of all trades | | Cons: | Heavy, not particularly sharp | | Sharpness: 5
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 6
Value: 8
Camera Used: K3 K1
Autofocus: 7
New Or Used: 5
| |
If people rate this lens highly for sharpness, they either have an exceptional copy or have never used quality glass before.
I am lucky to have found a copy cheap enough, but its been well used and seems to be a fairly representative copy of his lens and therefore value for money is not too bad.
Sharp it is NOT. At the wider end it's acceptable but there are of course far better lenses to use at 50 + mm
The problem it has is that it needs F8-9 to be sharp and that means to keep up acceptable images you need high shutter speeds and therefore pushes iso up.
As soon as a bird goes into shadows under a tree etc the iso raises and with a K3, the noise becomes problematic.
To get decent images you really need to either shoot at 400mm or under and best with a tripod or a stable surface to keep your iso down.
I go through images and delete, delete, delete delete .... hmmm maybe delete, delete, delete ... not bad delete delete etc etc.
The keeper rate is pretty hideous unless you take a lot of care.
Shoot RAW and keep NR down, use as high as megapixels as possible.
Because there is so much glass, elements and air racing in and out of the lens, it's prone to dust inside, so i'll get it sent in to the importer for a clean and callibrate.
Its a jack of all trades and gives you a massively wide range for wildlife and a max 750mm equivalent range.
Its ok at wider ranges and has pretty decent bokeh, so its got potential for some portrait work and a variety of work if your prepared to lug it around.
Auto focus speed is typical Sigma and quite reasonable.
When you pay what I have it's a good option and capable of reasonable bird results if you take your time
| | | | | | | Senior Member Registered: October, 2007 Location: Thach, Alabama Posts: 169
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 14, 2016 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | large focal range. Very good IQ with enough light. | | Cons: | Too Heavy for some. F6.3 at long end too slow. | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: K10D KX K7
Autofocus: 7
| |
I take just 2 lens on walk-abouts. The 18-55 Kit Lens and this one. The Bigma. That way the full focal range from 18mm to 500 mm is covered. It is heavy but I'm 6'2 1/2" and around 320lbs so I am big enough to carry and use it over a long span of time. With good light this lens is a Killer. I have worked for several years to get the ability to shoot steady hand held and do not use a tripod with it. I have tons of keepers at all focal lengths. Everything from portraits to landscapes to wildlife.
Early morning sunrise at long focal length.
Portrait from 9 feet away.
 | | | | | Senior Member Registered: February, 2011 Location: Brno Posts: 295
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 12, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $900.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | 50-500mm range, build quality, affordable | | Cons: | focusing sometimes unreliable, heavy | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: K20D, K5, K3, EPL-6
Autofocus: 8
New Or Used: Used
| |
I use(d) both non-OS Bigmas. The older Sig. 50-500/4-6.3 EX APO RF and I still have and use a bit updated Sig. 50-500/4-6.3 EX APO DG.
Range of this lens is unique and lens proved to be very useful when long reach is needed. Older non-DG had sometimes unreliable AF and needed something like +8 AF correction for my main camera. Also tripod leg was not removable (or at least for me). Image quality is quite good. Especially when the FF 50-500mm range and compactness is considered. Of course Sigma 500/4.5 has better image quality, but also costs MUCH more. Bigma is a bit better than SMC DA55-300/4-5.8, but weaker if you are countering light. DA55-300 has more contrast. If you're shooting long range into sun, then expect low contrast, weaker resolution and problematic post-process. HD DA55-300/4.5-6.3 is better through its range, but obviously 500mm is 500mm.
After some time I had chance to buy DG version. So I bought it. AF is a bit more reliable, tripod leg is removable, but a bit shorter :-(. Image quality is about the same, maybe even that older RF had a tad better resolution at 500mm. DG version has a bit different multicoating and a bit warmer colors. AF is fast enough on both, DG AF is a bit more consistent.
This lens needs some modern camera capable of clean ISO800-1600 for good use handheld. SR helps a lot, but does no magic. You'll need at least 1/200s shutter speed or faster at 500mm to keep image sharp. With K10D or other older models, or with film, you'll need good tripod or sunny day.
Lens is fine for birds, wild animals, airplanes and airshows, various battle reenactments and even interesting shots of landscapes (compressed city view). With this 500mm range users should expect that air pollution and heat waves in air might and will significantly affect photos.. which is not fail of the lens.
One problematic thing with this lens is its weight and length. This means that if you need to put it on a tripod with longer shutter speed at 500mm or with TC, then you're screwed unless you have extra heavy duty sturdy tripod with sturdy head. Get some which is created for 10-12kg+ otherwise you wont be able to freeze tiny movements and not talking about wind..
Lens is also usable with Pentax F1.7x AF TC still retaining some image quality. Phase detection AF at 1.7x 500mm does not work much (on K5), but contrast detect AF works even with this combo. That means cca 850mm F11 lens, which is equivalent to 1300mm/F11 lens on FF/Film ! 
It works quite ok with Kenko SHQ 1.5x TC. Pentax K3 does phase detect AF with this lens and teleconverter if there is enough daylight.
Some pics can be found at http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/michalnicak
 | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: March, 2009 Location: Salt Lake City, UT Posts: 509
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 9, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $600.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sturdy built, amazing zoom range, pretty good imq | | Cons: | Quirky design, MF is not well implemented, quality control. | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: K5 and Kx
| |
Intro: As said, this is heavy and built like a tank. It is known as the Bigma.
It is hand-holdable. But it would not last long for most people.
Macro is at 1:5.2 at 200mm. Not bad
Good: 10X zoom range is amazing. IMQ is pretty good. At 500mm end, it is better than DA55-300 at the 300mm end. That says something.
Very well built. Tolerance is high. Everything is tight. Better built than most Pentax current zoom lines.
Focusing is pretty fast in good light. It is faster than DA55-300. The speed is on par with my DA*60-250 under good light.
Aberration is well controlled. It is better than many Pentax zoom lenses.
Has the "A" setting if it means something to the user.
Bad: MF is quirkily implemented, like most other Sigma lenses.
Paint is not very durable.
Pretty heavy.
Quality control is an issue. I have to return this back to the owner, since it does not focus to infinity from 100-400mm.
Again, I love this beast. It is an optical miracle to a certain extent. Without the focusing problem, I would have kept it in my arsenal. Great for Thunderbirds and Blue Angels.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: May, 2008 Location: Hampshire Posts: 732 | | Review Date: August 11, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $850.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | 10 times zoom and even performance across the range , sharp and contrasty support teleconverters (Sigma) well with son contrast drop with the 2x | | Cons: | Weight and length when zoomed to 500 cumbersome but really goes with the territory | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 10
| |
If you need high IQ long zoom then theres very little choice.
Luckily this lens delivers with aplomb , a cut above the 55-300 ot 150-500 offerings
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: February, 2009 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 927
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: September 1, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $650.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Extreme range, build quality, *overall* image quality given its range | | Cons: | softness wide open at the full 500mm, aberations wide open, weight | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 8
| |
This is a brilliant lens if you keep in mind what it does.
It's not going to knock your socks off IQ wise at anything over ~350mm. HOWEVER. It's actually pretty good beyond this but as with all super telephotos the natural sharpness of the lens fights against camera shake and the need to use higher ISOs to combat this. Also the relatively slow f/6.3 aperture at the long end doesn't help.
Give it good light and at 500mm it will still reward with IQ:
At full size this lens is sharp enough for a 10x zoom at 500mm!
One area this lens is really strong in is bokeh. I swear it does not get enough praise:
The lens can give very bad results though this is normally because it's a technically challenging lens to use. Ultimately the quality you will get out of it will be based heavily on your paitience with it and how much effort you'll put into hulking it around. But it's the lens' flexibilty that it so good. It's a very cheap way to get to 500, but, hey, you've also got 50!!
But I love it for shots like this:
- for the amazing memories it can capture of scenes like this
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: September, 2009 Location: SoCal Posts: 1,292 | | Review Date: August 28, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $875.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Good value | | Cons: | Size and weight | |
I use it for daylight field sports, baseball and lacrosse. I have read in a number of reviews that a lot of zoom action will move a lot of air in and out of the lens. I have not experienced any dust issues as yet, but I never swap lenses in the field and my shooting so far has been in relatively 'clean' out door situations. I would think twice about using it in dusty situations such as auto rally, rally cross, BMX etc. I would also avoid field lens swapping if possible.
I bought a NANEU U60 smaller 'daypack' that will accept a D20 and the Bigma attached to pack the unit around and avoid any damage as the assembly is heavy and awkward. I use a Manfretto monopod. Both items work well and I am pleased so far. I placed reviews on both these items.
Low light focus in a cluttered field can be an issue at times. I also find I am shooting almost always above 100MM. I am very happy to date with the lens and have managed some great keepers that would have been missed without it.
My experience is from a hobbiest viewpoint. Camera is a k20D
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: February, 2010 Location: Salt Lake City, UT Posts: 1,910 | | Review Date: August 16, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $850.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Wow what a range. 500mm at an affordable price | | Cons: | Huge, collects dust internally, not as sharp as a prime, slow at the long end. | |
I picked one of these up used before they all disappear. Sigma would much rather sell you the OS model, and since we have built in SR, I thought I'd grab it while I can.
My biggest hurdle with this lens is that I have to plan to take it. It's big, it's bulky, it's heavy. I have to want to shoot something with this lens before I bust it out, or I'm likely to leave it at home.
When I'm shooting with it at 500mm I find that I can hand hold it in good light, and the AF doesn't hunt too much, but I have to take a bunch of photos to find the one I want to keep.
The lens is better when stopped down, which means not handholding it, however I do find that (at least my copy) it's quite sharp wide open; just not as sharp as you'll get from a prime, the DA* 60-250 or the FA* 80-200. Of course, you're probably buying this lens to shoot at the longer end anyway.
Zooming this lens in and out creates a lot of airflow inside the lens, and means you'll collect dust. There's just no way around it. I've got a few specks, and at some point, I expect a cleaning will be in order.
I've been surprised by how close it will let me focus at 500mm, and it's let me take a few photos that I wouldn't have thought possible. It's no 1:1 macro, but I can get some wicked close up shots close focusing at 500mm.
All in all, at $850, I feel quite good about this purchase.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: January, 2010 Location: Istanbul Posts: 241 | | Review Date: July 4, 2010 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | colors, sharpness,angle coverage, bokeh | | Cons: | zoom ring too heavy | |
The only problem what I have is the heaviness of the zoom ring. It's becoming a big obstacle for me to turn the zoom ring when I'm shooting moving objects. Until I turn the ring, my object is passing and already gone. Doesanybody know if there are any methods to make it softer and lighter.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: August, 2008 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 100 | | Review Date: April 13, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $800.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Great zoom range, solid construction | | Cons: | Heavy, slow f-stop | |
I think I would rate it at 8.5 if there's such a scale.
I've shot with this lens on multiple occasions and I find a monopod really helpful. The strap attached to the collar is a good idea to alleviate the stress on the camera mount. This lens is quite big when fully extended to 500mm, so you might have trouble sneaking it into some sports venues. I think the ability to bring it back to the "wide" end is very useful as you probably don't want to be switching this lens in and out of your camera (it's a hassle) too often in the field.
I think with a lens like this practice is definitely needed to bring up the "keep ratio", but it's perfectly doable.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: July, 2009 Location: Perth, Australia Posts: 180
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: September 6, 2009 | Not Recommended | Price: $1,400.00
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | not a lot | | Cons: | waste of money as there are better options | |
I was originally very excited to purchase this lens. I did a good 3-4 DAYS worth of online reviewing before purchasing the lens.
I primarily bought this lens so that I could capture my son playing soccer. In very bright conditions the lens was acceptable in the 100-350mm range but anything outside those ranges the lens just didn't perform all that well.
I am also convinced that it doesn't reach an actual 500mm, feels more like 450mm.
I will give this lens credit for what it is. It is very consistent with the IQ but unfortunatley, it just loses the sharpness after 350mm. I also had to return TWO copies of this lens that developed AF issues. I came to the conclusion it is related to the mechanism between the MF/AF switching. The gears don't engage properly.
I think this lens tries too hard to be a jack of all trades, and to a degree it is successful but it is a master of none and that is a dissapointment. I really wish a bit more effort was placed on the IQ of this lens after 350mm, but considering the price, you can't expect it to be much better than what it is.
What I would recommend is purchasing the Sigma 100-300mm f/4 with a 1.4x TC. You will get about the same reach at the long end as the BIGMA but you will be a lot more satisfied with your pictures.
DO NOT waste your time and money on the 150-500mm HSM. That lens performed even WORSE than the BIGMA. Infact, the BIGMOS and BIGMA are worlds appart in IQ even though they should technically be identical.
To me it was overall a bit of a dissapointment. I really wanted to like this lens but it just didn't meet my expectations. The conditions have to be absolutely perfect (which rarely are) so this kind of makes the lens obselete.
Good try Sigma, but I think you missed the mark with this lens.
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: June, 2008 Location: Idaho Posts: 2,375 | | Review Date: January 12, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $980.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | 10:1 zoom ratio, long reach at 500mm | | Cons: | low speed, somewhat high cost, weight, 86mm filters | |
I recently purchased this lens to extend my long focal length options. I used to have a 400mm Vivitar Series I for my screw thread Pentax camera, and missed that focal length when I moved to a new FA mount camera. Seeing good ratings for the Sigma, I decided on it as a replacement and so far I haven't been disappointed, realizing from the start that prime and faster lenses could beat it one-on-one. All considered though, this lens delivers. As some reviewers noted, its 500mm end is visibly soft unless stopped down around f8, but it is a very sharp lens for a zoom at focal lengths below 400mm. I probably won't use it much below 100mm but I believe it beats my Pentax 28-200mm lens in resolution at 200mm so I'll probably use it anytime I need more than 135mm f.l.. It's just a plus that if I have it on and want a 50mm shot - I don't have to change lenses. The zoom locks so lens won't extend when you don't want it to, and it also locks to limit the short end of the zoom at 100mm, so the rear element won't hit a teleconverter element when closed to the 50mm f.l. (with the Kenko mentioned below, the latter doesn't seem to be a problem). It has a focus ring that is disengaged until it is pulled back toward the mount, where it then allows manual focus (camera autofocus intended to be disengaged when doing this). Its sheer mass makes telephoto shots possible without a tripod (when needed) since it doesn't have much tendency to "wiggle" due to its weight. Got the DG version but can't make comparisons since I'm not familiar with the previous non-DG design. I've used it with a Kenko 1.4 teleconverter which might be making use of the increased central resolution of the DG design because little softness is observed under normal use. Again, I can't complain about reasonably sharp (stopped down) 700mm reach for less than $1k, other than the lack of faster glass (well, for less than $1k, I might not be able to complain about that either). Only real downside I've seen so far is its weight and requirement for 86mm filters. To really impress someone, just extend it to the 500mm focal length and install the lens shade!
| | |
