Sony and Sigma 500mm + Sony 14TC

About four months ago there was a thread on Backcountry gallery phot. forum about the limits imposed by Sony on Sigma 500: speed max 15fps and no TC.

Having bought a 500mm for my A1 I decided to "dumb down" the TC directly connecting the two cables coming out from the bayonets. with some help I was able to built a pcb that substitutes the original one .

The camera see only the lens ,like it happens with extension tubes, the lens works very well : autofocus , vibration reduction and exposure as good as any tele with a TC.

The f.stop and focal length are obviously reported wrong.

I would have bought a dumb TC from Meike or Neewer but I had to do it myself and I still hope Sony would stop imposing these silly limitations.

Lisperit said:

About four months ago there was a thread on Backcountry gallery phot. forum about the limits imposed by Sony on Sigma 500: speed max 15fps and no TC.

Having bought a 500mm for my A1 I decided to "dumb down" the TC directly connecting the two cables coming out from the bayonets. with some help I was able to built a pcb that substitutes the original one .

The camera see only the lens ,like it happens with extension tubes, the lens works very well : autofocus , vibration reduction and exposure as good as any tele with a TC.

The f.stop and focal length are obviously reported wrong.

I would have bought a dumb TC from Meike or Neewer but I had to do it myself and I still hope Sony would stop imposing these silly limitations.

Click to expand...

Thanks for this, can you post any samples? Do Meike/Newer make a dumb TC?

Lisperit said:

--
Lisperit

Click to expand...

Yeah that's one of the few issues I have with Sony - or rather Sony's way of handling things.

In many cases Sigma lenses are far superior to similar Sony lenses, the Art series in particular is running circles around their Sony counterparts. Limiting third party lenses isn't going to change or improve that, it'll only irritate people who buy those third party lenses because of their image quality and other properties.

When it comes to Sigma (tele) lenses it's particularly annoying because Sigma designed them to work with teleconverters for their L-mount versions - so they really are made to be used with 1.4x and 2.0x TCs anyway. So Sony should really consider either allowing Sigma to sell their own TCs for Sony-E mount or unlock the Sony TCs so that they work with third party lenses.

The worst part is that you can use older adapted lenses with TCs - for example Canon EF lenses - and it works just fine and with high quality TCs and lenses the image quality is pretty good.

EDIT: but I have to admit, I'm not quite willing to tinker with the connections or pins or electronics of the camera/lens/TC system to get it to work. Especially not with the high-end camera systems.

You are right about the risks , I had to verify the connections with the utmost care but it is not rocket science, the main effort was finding the right connectors , the two bayonets use two different cables to connect to the original pcb.

Crispy_Bee said:

Yeah that's one of the few issues I have with Sony - or rather Sony's way of handling things.

In many cases Sigma lenses are far superior to similar Sony lenses, the Art series in particular is running circles around their Sony counterparts.

Click to expand...

That seems like a broad generalization... Which Art series lens in particular is running circles around a GM?

Crispy_Bee said:

Limiting third party lenses isn't going to change or improve that, it'll only irritate people who buy those third party lenses because of their image quality and other properties.

Click to expand...

The people buying Sigma Art lenses in particular don't really have another choice though, L mount is pretty niche and Sigma hasn't yet made those FF lenses for RF or Z...

Crispy_Bee said:

When it comes to Sigma (tele) lenses it's particularly annoying because Sigma designed them to work with teleconverters for their L-mount versions - so they really are made to be used with 1.4x and 2.0x TCs anyway. So Sony should really consider either allowing Sigma to sell their own TCs for Sony-E mount or unlock the Sony TCs so that they work with third party lenses.

Click to expand...

As an enthusiast we would all love this, of course, but why should Sony really consider doing it? They'd be giving up leverage and sales of some Sony lenses, for nothing. Until those Sigma lenses show up with less limitations on RF or Z there's nothing leveraging Sony to take action here...

Crispy_Bee said:

The worst part is that you can use older adapted lenses with TCs - for example Canon EF lenses - and it works just fine and with high quality TCs and lenses the image quality is pretty good.

EDIT: but I have to admit, I'm not quite willing to tinker with the connections or pins or electronics of the camera/lens/TC system to get it to work. Especially not with the high-end camera systems.

Click to expand...

Impulses said:

Crispy_Bee said:

Yeah that's one of the few issues I have with Sony - or rather Sony's way of handling things.

In many cases Sigma lenses are far superior to similar Sony lenses, the Art series in particular is running circles around their Sony counterparts.

Click to expand...

That seems like a broad generalization... Which Art series lens in particular is running circles around a GM?

Click to expand...

Quite a few actually. Macros, zooms, fixed focal lengths.

Overall I doubt anyone gets into Sony because of the Sony lenses, especially considering the fact that Sony simply doesn't produce certain lenses at all (such as a light weight compact long focal length for example). Enter Sigma.

Impulses said:

Impulses said:

Limiting third party lenses isn't going to change or improve that, it'll only irritate people who buy those third party lenses because of their image quality and other properties.

Click to expand...

The people buying Sigma Art lenses in particular don't really have another choice though, L mount is pretty niche and Sigma hasn't yet made those FF lenses for RF or Z...

Click to expand...

Except for the ones you can adapt.

Impulses said:

Impulses said:

When it comes to Sigma (tele) lenses it's particularly annoying because Sigma designed them to work with teleconverters for their L-mount versions - so they really are made to be used with 1.4x and 2.0x TCs anyway. So Sony should really consider either allowing Sigma to sell their own TCs for Sony-E mount or unlock the Sony TCs so that they work with third party lenses.

Click to expand...

As an enthusiast we would all love this, of course, but why should Sony really consider doing it? They'd be giving up leverage and sales of some Sony lenses, for nothing. Until those Sigma lenses show up with less limitations on RF or Z there's nothing leveraging Sony to take action here...

Click to expand...

Because it's one more good reason to get a Sony camera.

Lisperit said:

...Having bought a 500mm for my A1 I decided to "dumb down" the TC directly connecting the two cables coming out from the bayonets. with some help I was able to built a pcb that substitutes the original one .

The camera see only the lens ,like it happens with extension tubes, the lens works very well : autofocus , vibration reduction and exposure as good as any tele with a TC.

The f.stop and focal length are obviously reported wrong.

Click to expand...

Congrats! I wonder what stops the A1 et al recognizing the Sigma via the original PCB? Software saying if NOT SONY LENS and TC detected THEN flag incompatible? IF so then maybe a 3rd party could just remove the TC signal... ie register your 1000/11 as such.

Lisperit said:

I would have bought a dumb TC from Meike or Neewer but I had to do it myself and I still hope Sony would stop imposing these silly limitations.

Click to expand...

There are no 3rd party E mount TCs AFAIK. I have run an A mount Kenko 1.4x on an LA-EA5 - AF works OK on the 70-210/4 beercan, but not (due to aperture, no doubt) on the 100-400/4.5-6.7 (A mount lenses)...

Lisperit said:

I decided to "dumb down" the TC directly connecting the two cables coming out from the bayonets. with some help I was able to built a pcb that substitutes the original one .

Click to expand...

Would like to see a picture of your modified TC.

-I only exchanged the original pcb with mine. Five small screws; reassembling the TC with the o-ring in the right position requires patience and good hands..












Lisperit

Much easier method, no risky hardware manipulation:

1. Attach Sigma 500mm lens to Sony E-mount camera
2. Shut down camera, wait 2-3 seconds
3. Attach Sony TC to lens and body
4. Turn on camera again
5. Turn off camera again, wait 2-3 seconds
6. Turn on camera again - TC should now work (no AF, no TC data in EXIF)
7. Repeat on/off cycle if TC is not recognized

Philex said:

Much easier method, no risky hardware manipulation:

1. Attach Sigma 500mm lens to Sony E-mount camera
2. Shut down camera, wait 2-3 seconds
3. Attach Sony TC to lens and body
4. Turn on camera again
5. Turn off camera again, wait 2-3 seconds
6. Turn on camera again - TC should now work (no AF, no TC data in EXIF)

Click to expand...

No AF?

Philex said:

7. Repeat on/off cycle if TC is not recognized

Click to expand...

Ah OK, I missed the fact that AF is working with the hardware hack. Which is of course quite intriguing if the TC is mainly to be used with the Sigma and not with other Sony lenses.

Crispy_Bee said:

Impulses said:

Crispy_Bee said:

Yeah that's one of the few issues I have with Sony - or rather Sony's way of handling things.

In many cases Sigma lenses are far superior to similar Sony lenses, the Art series in particular is running circles around their Sony counterparts.

Click to expand...

That seems like a broad generalization... Which Art series lens in particular is running circles around a GM?

Click to expand...

Quite a few actually. Macros, zooms, fixed focal lengths.

Click to expand...

Care to name specifics? The 35/1.4 Art is heavier and has noticeably worse flare handling than the GM for instance, worse MFD too. I know some excel much more, but I wouldn't cast generalizations about the whole line...

Crispy_Bee said:

Overall I doubt anyone gets into Sony because of the Sony lenses, especially considering the fact that Sony simply doesn't produce certain lenses at all (such as a light weight compact long focal length for example). Enter Sigma.

Click to expand...

I got into E mount for the combination of Samyang and Sony primes, plus Tamron zooms. I have a ton of respect for how Sigma operates and how they do things, and they've filled a few niches (like with that 90mm f2.8), but I don't think they're completely essential to E mount given all the other 3rd parties doing interesting things.

OTOH I do think it would be a coup if RF or Z mount ever got Sigma FF lenses, but it doesn't seem to be happening anytime soon. Other than Tamron, they're the one big 3rd party domino still to fall, but Viltrox is aggressively filling some of the same holes Sigma would on Z.

Crispy_Bee said:

Crispy_Bee said:

Crispy_Bee said:

Limiting third party lenses isn't going to change or improve that, it'll only irritate people who buy those third party lenses because of their image quality and other properties.

Click to expand...

The people buying Sigma Art lenses in particular don't really have another choice though, L mount is pretty niche and Sigma hasn't yet made those FF lenses for RF or Z...

Click to expand...

Except for the ones you can adapt.

Crispy_Bee said:

Crispy_Bee said:

When it comes to Sigma (tele) lenses it's particularly annoying because Sigma designed them to work with teleconverters for their L-mount versions - so they really are made to be used with 1.4x and 2.0x TCs anyway. So Sony should really consider either allowing Sigma to sell their own TCs for Sony-E mount or unlock the Sony TCs so that they work with third party lenses.

Click to expand...

As an enthusiast we would all love this, of course, but why should Sony really consider doing it? They'd be giving up leverage and sales of some Sony lenses, for nothing. Until those Sigma lenses show up with less limitations on RF or Z there's nothing leveraging Sony to take action here...

Click to expand...

Because it's one more good reason to get a Sony camera.

Click to expand...

I don't think it would benefit Sony's bottom line enough, and once they do that they can never go back. Only they would know though, and as you argued in another thread, if they haven't it's probably for good reason...

It works also on Sony of course : full AF , OS and using on Sigma 500 I mantain the lens easy focus memory setting with one button press, something my 200-600 lacks.

Coming from Nikon world the only more thing I would have is the focus fine tuning , useful also on mirrorless to control DOF distribution .

Lisperit said:

It works also on Sony of course : full AF , OS and using on Sigma 500 I mantain the lens easy focus memory setting with one button press, something my 200-600 lacks.

Coming from Nikon world the only more thing I would have is the focus fine tuning , useful also on mirrorless to control DOF distribution .

Click to expand...

It's impressive that you were able to do this, have you thought about speaking to anyone who could provide the hack by sending their 1.4*TC in?

Lisperit said:

--
Lisperit

Click to expand...

Indeed. Or better yet the possibility to order the modified printed circuit board for DIY assembly!

alphaZ said:

Lisperit said:

It works also on Sony of course : full AF , OS and using on Sigma 500 I mantain the lens easy focus memory setting with one button press, something my 200-600 lacks.

Coming from Nikon world the only more thing I would have is the focus fine tuning , useful also on mirrorless to control DOF distribution .

Click to expand...

It's impressive that you were able to do this, have you thought about speaking to anyone who could provide the hack by sending their 1.4*TC in?

Click to expand...

The Sigma 500/5.6 DG DN and Sony 1.4 TC work very well together, good copies assumed. The wonderful high resolution sharpness and contrast are nearly entirely retained at 700mm F8 with the A7R V, even with long distance subjects. I get far better results on a constant basis compared to my previous copies of 3 Sony 200-600 G copies, and even the 100-400 GM.

Philex said:

The Sigma 500/5.6 DG DN and Sony 1.4 TC work very well together, good copies assumed. The wonderful high resolution sharpness and contrast are nearly entirely retained at 700mm F8 with the A7R V, even with long distance subjects. I get far better results on a constant basis compared to my previous copies of 3 Sony 200-600 G copies, and even the 100-400 GM.

Click to expand...

by work really well together though, you mean without AF? I have the same A7RV combo, but am thinking lately about some situations where I want more reach without weight of way the 400-800 Sony.

Mike Arledge said:

Philex said:

The Sigma 500/5.6 DG DN and Sony 1.4 TC work very well together, good copies assumed. The wonderful high resolution sharpness and contrast are nearly entirely retained at 700mm F8 with the A7R V, even with long distance subjects. I get far better results on a constant basis compared to my previous copies of 3 Sony 200-600 G copies, and even the 100-400 GM.

Click to expand...

by work really well together though, you mean without AF? I have the same A7RV combo, but am thinking lately about some situations where I want more reach without weight of way the 400-800 Sony.

Click to expand...

Really think Sony would receive so much praise if they removed the FPS cap and TC restrictions on 3rd party lenses, it's seriously in their interests.

Impulses said:

Crispy_Bee said:

Impulses said:

Crispy_Bee said:

Yeah that's one of the few issues I have with Sony - or rather Sony's way of handling things.

In many cases Sigma lenses are far superior to similar Sony lenses, the Art series in particular is running circles around their Sony counterparts.

Click to expand...

That seems like a broad generalization... Which Art series lens in particular is running circles around a GM?

Click to expand...

Quite a few actually. Macros, zooms, fixed focal lengths.

Click to expand...

Care to name specifics? The 35/1.4 Art is heavier and has noticeably worse flare handling than the GM for instance, worse MFD too. I know some excel much more, but I wouldn't cast generalizations about the whole line...

Click to expand...

Sigma 105mm 2.8 DN Macro Art vs Sony 90mm Macro
Sigma 50mm 2.0 DG C / 1.4 DG DN Art vs Sony 50mm 2.5 G / 1.8 / 1.4GM
Sigma 35mm 2.0 DG C / 1.4 DG DN Art /1.2 DG DN Art vs Sony FE 35mm 2.8 ZA / 1.8 / 1.4 ZA
Sigma 24mm 3.5 DG / 2.0 DG C vs Sony 24mm 2.8 G / 1.4 GM
Sigma 20mm 2.0 DG C / 20mm 1.4 DG Art vs Sony 20mm 1.8 G
Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 DG DN Art vs Sony 24-70mm 2.8 GM (GM II is much improved but so is the Art II version)
Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 DG DN OS S vs Sony 70-200 2.8 GM OSS II (on par at the long end, Sigma far better at 70mm)
Sigma 150-600mm DG DN OS S vs Sony 200-600mm G OSS. This one is debatable but to me the Sigma is sharper across the frame at every overlapping focal length - at 600 the Sony might have a tiny edge in the center (but not really noticeble) however in the edges and corners the Sigma is better.

So yeah, those are quite a few I'd say (and I did say "in many cases", which seems to be correct).

And one thing should be mentioned: this is with corrections applied and Sony lenses in general require a lot more correction than the Sigma lenses, which translates to a reduction in overall IQ. The Sony 24-105mm f4 is particularly nasty in that regard and not very good if you turn off lens corrections. Sigma doesn't have a 24-105mm but instead offer a 28-105mm f2.8 Art which is pretty good even wide open.