Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Sigma 600 mirror
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Jun 18, 2015 12:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Looks pretty good to me. Smile


PostPosted: Fri Jun 19, 2015 7:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Does this lens have rear "teleconverter", as 500mm mirror vivitars have, which can be removed, so lens will become 350mm and F5.6 ?


PostPosted: Fri Jun 19, 2015 8:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
CuriousOne wrote:
Does this lens have rear "teleconverter", as 500mm mirror vivitars have, which can be removed, so lens will become 350mm and F5.6 ?


User accessible teleconverter? No. Or do you mean mounted within the body of the lens? IMO, I don't think so. I'm basing this on comparison to Tamron 500 f/8. Everything I've read about the Tamron is that it's a true 500 f/8. The Sigma's mirror section is physically larger than the Tamron to achieve 600mm f/8.

Never used the Vivitar, nor seen one up close. But sounds like it must be smaller/shorter mirror portion with a longer back end.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 19, 2015 8:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
BeardsAreBest wrote:
Looks pretty good to me. Smile


Smile

Perhaps good enough.
But I have a bad tendency to tinker and get myself into trouble. I've let a few fungus cleaning jobs turn into proverbial tar babies! Smile

Seeing that it could return better resolution like in your sample, eggs me on to disassemble it to see if it can be tweaked. The mirrors look pristine, and the alignment is good as pics show. Perhaps one or all of the fixed elements in the rear end needs adjusting to get that last bit of sharpness.

I will resist the urge to mess with this one. Very Happy


PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2015 4:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think resisting the urge is a good move. You would need special collimation equipment to make sure you have it collimated properly if you'll be trying to reposition any of the elements/mirrors.

As for built-in teleconverters -- neither the Tamron nor the Sigma have one. They are just straight catadioptric mirrors. But they both work well with external teleconverters.

Regarding the Vivitar 600mm solid cat, it is sort of a squat design. Not as long as others, and I'm guessing that this is because of its solid glass internals. Here's a pic of one I snagged off the 'net. This one is actually labeled Perkin-Elmer, but it's the exact same lens as the Vivitar.



Here's a shot of the same lens, but it carries the Vivitar Series 1 label:



PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2015 7:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
First try shooting the Moon this early evening. I also tried it with a 2x teleconverter, but results weren't worth posting.

lunar crescent by wNG 555, on Flickr


PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2015 8:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, there is built-in 2 lens teleconverter in all samyang and derivatives 500/8 lens. Even russian MTO-11 has same built-in element. It can be removed, lens becomes approx 0.7X shorter and faster, but also register distance decreases, so it can only be used on NEX via Slim M42 adapter.

I have choice to buy either Sigma 600/8 or Samyang 800/8 for the same price. Have no ability to pre-test or return, so should decide as it is. With which one I have higher chances getting a better quality lens?


PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2015 1:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Posted pics with mine and they seem to be fine,no one commented so I have no feedback.It appears to be sharp(using focus peak)It is also for sale but most people on the forum want cheap and good condition.mine is in excellent condition ,complete but priced realistically in this condition.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2015 2:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
PM me your pricing, please.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2015 6:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
CuriousOne wrote:
I have choice to buy either Sigma 600/8 or Samyang 800/8 for the same price. Have no ability to pre-test or return, so should decide as it is. With which one I have higher chances getting a better quality lens?


Based on my own experience with these two lenses, I would recommend the Sigma. For two reasons, mostly.

1) Samyang's quality control is likely not as good as Sigma's. The Samyang 800/8 I bought was hopelessly soft and because of this, it was almost impossible to tell when a subject was "in focus." I used quotes because even when a subject was in focus, the subject was very soft. I've owned two Sigma 600/8s. The one I bought back in about 1984 was an excellent optic. The one I bought a few months ago is just okay. It's passable. Much better than the Samyang, but not nearly as good as the one I used to own.

Now, if you're feeling lucky, if you get a good Samyang 800mm mirror, you've got a great lens. But it is a gamble, IMO. So the only way I'd buy one would be that I were guaranteed the right to return it, which is what I did with the one I bought. And since you aren't, that would be enough for me to shy away from it.

2) The focusing throw on the Samyang is very short. Not more than 90 degrees, 1/4 turn from closest focus to infinity. At the magnification levels and narrow depth of field one has with an 800mm f/8, this makes focusing very touchy. Whereas the Sigma's focusing throw is almost 360 degrees -- almost one full turn. This makes focusing much easier, but even with this much longer focusing throw, final focusing can still be quite touchy. Again, I'm writing from experience here.

If the seller(s) would be willing to provide you with some high-resolution images taken with these lenses, this would help a great deal in the decision making process.

Also, one final bit I just recalled. The Samyang mirror's entire rear housing is plastic, so it is not as rugged as the Sigma, whose rear housing is massively constructed and very sturdy. It has an excellent tripod mount, whereas the Samyang has none.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2015 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks a lot for suggestions!

Short focus throw is not a problem in my case, since lens will be used for subjects at least 150 meters away, but image quality is, just samyang attracted me with greater magnification...


PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2015 7:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Forgot to mention, these Sigma's appear in "normal" and "XQ" version, what is the actual diference, besides visual look?


PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2015 10:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I don't have specifics regarding the differences of individual models, but XQ is Sigma's marketing line of higher performing lenses.
Like Tokina's AT-X and Tamron's SP lines.

I don't know if you're going to get the build quality upgrade of let say a Tokina AT-X, (based on my single experience with an XQ product, the build quality not robust, but optically excellent.)
but the optical performance should be better. Probably more precisely tuned before leaving their factory.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 21, 2015 4:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm not 100% certain, but I believe the Sigma XQ is a 500mm mirror, which they made before the 600mm mirror. I'm not familiar with the "normal" designation. But neither of the 600 mirrors I've owned or own have the XQ label.

If you just shop around on eBay and google it, then click on "images," you'll find that Sigma has made the 600mm f/8 in a lot of different versions -- finish versions at least. The earliest had just a plain gloss black finish. But then later on, Sigma began producing the lens in a textured finish and it was available in white, black, gray, olive green, and probably others. As far as I know, though, there is no structural difference in any of these lenses. Another difference -- some of the earlier ones had a metal handle for the rear filter, and some didn't.

I've tried tracking serial numbers, but they don't seem to track all that well. I've found 200 thousands and 300 thousands and 900 thousands, but nothing in between. Then the S/Ns jump up to over a million. The earliest have the S/Ns located close to the front filter ring, whereas the late ones have the S/N located at the rear of the body.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 21, 2015 7:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well, I have Tokina AT-X 80-200/2.8 lens. I can't say that it's a good performer at all. It is heavy and solidly built, but it does not makes it easier to carry around. Image quality is so so - huge purple fringing, which only gets slightly reduced at F8 or slower, but never goes away. It has one big advantage - butter smooth bokeh, way better than any fixed zoom lens of same distance/aperture.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 21, 2015 7:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Most of Tokina's longer lenses suffered from CA. The 400mm has incredibly bad fringing.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 21, 2015 8:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hey CuriousOne, are you sure you posted that to the right thread? We're discussing the Sigma 600 in this thread . . .

However, on the topic of ATX zooms, I own a copy of the 100-300mm f/4 SD and it is an outstanding performer. When shooting with it on my Canon DSLR, I've found the purple fringing to be negligible, if not non-existent, even when shooting wide open. Very well controlled.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 21, 2015 1:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I just mentioned it to show that build quality has nothing to do with image quality, and if some plastic lens provides better IQ than all metal lens, why should I refuse?


PostPosted: Sun Jun 21, 2015 7:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I brought up the Tokina AT-X and Tamron SP comparision. And didn't mean to take the topic off tangent.

It was simply to point out the difference between Sigma's XQ to other brands' top lines that I have some experience with. The others usually come with improved physical and optical systems.
In the case of Tokina AT-X, the couple of zoom models I have, are over-built. A Sigma XQ 400mm f/5.6 is what I own. And it's build is below average IMO. Precision of focus and aperture mechanisms is poor. But its optical performance is very good. 1 out of 2 isn't bad given it delivers the goods. But better build quality is a plus, especially after using AT-X and SP.

Aside:
Unlike your experience, I've had good results from my AT-X 80-200 f/2.8 SD. Not sure if there were any revision difference with yours (mine has the APO element), but I have little CA and although purple fringing is evident, it's not prominent. My only complaint with this lens is it's lack of performance wide open, which was the point of creating a f/2.8.
As for build, I dropped mine on a tiled floor once. Not a scratch or mark, no effect to optical performance. IIRC, the floor suffered damage.

I also own their AT-X 100-300 f/4 SD, for Nikon mount, and it is a superb lens. And that seems to be the consensus. No sign of CA or fringing or coma, like previously mentioned.

At the other end, it's an AT-X 28-85 f/3.5-4.5, and it's also an excellent little zoom lens. IIRC, their very first AT-X.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 22, 2015 3:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
CuriousOne wrote:
I just mentioned it to show that build quality has nothing to do with image quality, and if some plastic lens provides better IQ than all metal lens, why should I refuse?


Sure, but it doesn't hurt knowing of a potential Achilles heel. The entire rear section of that Samyang is plastic -- even the T-mount. And considering it doesn't have a tripod mount, that means all the strain is on those plastic T-mount threads. To me, that's reason enough to be very careful when using that lens.

WNG555, I know what you mean about Sigma's variable build quality. I've owned some Sigma lenses that felt very cheap and zooms with sloppy zoom collars. I recall a Sigma 135mm f/1.8 I owned back when I was a camera dealer. It was in M42 and the mechanism it used to stop the lens down was very coarse and prone to locking up. I dismantled the mount more than once, trying to make it a more consistent performer. As I recall, a spot of moly grease mostly took care of the problem, but it was still sloppy feeling. But "variable" is a good adjective to use, I think, when it comes to the lenses Sigma has produced. Right now, in addition to the 600 mirror, I have a nice Sigma 80-230mm f/4.5 in M42 that looks like it was built back in the 70s. It's a push-pull zoom, but the craftsmanship is quite high. It is really just a very nice looking zoom and it's actually a surprisingly good performer. I was originally planning on selling it, but then I realized that because it's a Sigma zoom from the 70s, I probably wouldn't be able to get much for it, and it is worth more to me than whatever I could get for it. My M42 cameras could use a good zoom.



Like that old zoom, the big Sigma 600 mirror is at the other end of the spectrum in terms of build quality. It's as well made and sturdy as any lens you'd care to name. The only plastic on my EOS mount lens is the holder for the filter. The Canon FD-mount one I owned had a red plastic button that was used to unlock the breechlock collar, in addition to the plastic filter holder. Otherwise it was all metal and glass. And rubberized focusing collar. It's too bad there is some significant variability in optical quality with this lens.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 22, 2015 5:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Back to the Sigma 600mm f/8....this is from Sunday night, 29.2% waxing crescent.
Results were better than the previous outing.

Sunday's 29% Waxing Crescent by wNG 555, on Flickr


PostPosted: Mon Jun 22, 2015 5:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have TOU/Five Stars MC 500/8 lens, which has great image quality even at F8. It is lightweight, but too long, so I'm looking for a mirror replacement for it. Later I'll try to capture moon using it, so let's compare and see how it performs against sigma.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 22, 2015 1:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
WNG555, I just took a look at the full size image over at Flickr of your moon shot. Honestly I don't see how you could ask for anything better. That is an excellent shot of the moon. In an earlier post, you mentioned that this copy is a white one with a high serial number (over 1 million). So that blows to smithereens my theory about loose tolerances due to the age of the manufacturing equipment. So it looks like it might just be more of a roll of the dice, then, when it comes to getting a good copy.

If I can remember to do so, I'll drag out my Tamron 500 and Sigma 600 tonight and take some moonshots too. It'll make for some interesting comparisons. And I guess if I'm feeling really ambitious, I'll set up one of my old CPO refractors -- very sharp telephotos -- and see how they compare to the CPO, which is a benchmark I use for these sorts of things.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 22, 2015 4:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Just won Sigma 600/8 in Canon FD mount for $50.99+$10 shipping. Seller says "in excellent condition" and it looks so, let's see: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sigma-Mirror-Telephoto-F-8-0-MC-Lens-Canon-FD-Manual-Focus-Mount-1994-/381295957788?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2047675.l2557&nma=true&si=S5vrd%252BZ6hCv07dlDqVbNt6JY3mQ%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc


PostPosted: Mon Jun 22, 2015 4:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
That's an early one -- high-gloss black finish -- and it looks just like the one I used to own. I hope yours is a good as mine was. And that was a sensational price, too! Wow, $50 for a Sigma 600. It wasn't too long ago the Sigma 600s were selling on eBay for between $250 and $300. Sometimes even more.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 4 of 7