Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 01 Oct 2017 (Sunday) 08:12
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Is my Sigma 100-600 C Lens Faulty

 
gjl711
They have pills for that now you know.
Avatar
53,864 posts
Likes: 1480
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Oct 03, 2017 07:07 |  #31

Orias wrote in post #18465080 (external link)
...I also took off the filter from my EF 70-300L for this trip, just in case. That one didn't seem to make too much different from previous shots, but it was worth a try just in case. I just worry about scratching the glass or something on the more expensive lenses.

Cheers

If your worried about scratching the front element, use a hood or pop on the lens cap between shots.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 404
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
     
Oct 03, 2017 09:34 |  #32

gjl711 wrote in post #18465134 (external link)
If your worried about scratching the front element, use a hood or pop on the lens cap between shots.

Also, if the tigers scratch the front element, it’s the lesser problem :)


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,604 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Likes: 470
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
     
Oct 03, 2017 23:19 |  #33

You really aught to just do controlled tests of your lenses with filters if you tend to use them. Many/most lenses will be fine in normal light (i.e. sun or bright light not causing flare). But every so often a lens will just not take a filter, even a good quality one. The 70-300L might be just fine. Usually the greater the magnification, the more likely to be a problem. Also the larger the front element because the filter needs to be flat with parallel sides across more of the filter.

It clearly depends on the lens a bit too because the old 100-400 was notorious for IQ degradation with any filter.


Edward Jenner
5DIII, 7DII, M6, GX1 II,M11-22, Sig15mm FE,16-35 F4,TS-E 17,Sig 18-250 OS Macro,M18-150,24-105,T45 1.8VC,70-200 f4 IS,70-200 2.8 vII,Sig 85 1.4,100L,135L,400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Orias
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
109 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 85
Joined May 2011
Location: Madrid, Spain
     
Oct 04, 2017 13:17 |  #34

CheshireCat wrote in post #18464813 (external link)
Nice shots, but we need 100% crops to tell you whether there is something wrong.
To be honest, the tigers don’t look sharp even at web resolution.

Been a bit busy with work, but here's a quick shot + 100% crop to show some of the details I got at 600mm on some shots:


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Canon EOS 70D + Canon EF 70-300 F4-5.6L IS USM + Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM + Canon 10-18mm IS USM, Canon 18-135mm, Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon 55-250mm IS + Canon Speedlight 430 EXII
My Site - Arup Photography (external link)
500px - http://500px.com/arnie​arup (external link)
Flickr - James Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 404
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
     
Oct 04, 2017 17:13 as a reply to  @ Orias's post |  #35

Works for me ;)


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jethr0
Senior Member
Avatar
848 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Likes: 434
Joined Aug 2012
Location: ON, Canada
     
Oct 04, 2017 17:30 |  #36

Looks plenty sharp to me.


www.jefflowe.ca (external link)
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/jeff​lowe.ca (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Orias
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
109 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 85
Joined May 2011
Location: Madrid, Spain
     
Oct 05, 2017 07:34 |  #37

Yeah, I agree! It's a LOT less forgiving than the Canon, but with the right conditions, it works really well.
My general hit-rate with the Canon lens was a lot better, but once I get used to this one, and get some more practise in, I'm sure the keeper rate will also go up.

Cheers


Canon EOS 70D + Canon EF 70-300 F4-5.6L IS USM + Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM + Canon 10-18mm IS USM, Canon 18-135mm, Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon 55-250mm IS + Canon Speedlight 430 EXII
My Site - Arup Photography (external link)
500px - http://500px.com/arnie​arup (external link)
Flickr - James Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
evelakes
Goldmember
Avatar
2,028 posts
Gallery: 91 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 7200
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Netherlands Wijchen
     
Oct 05, 2017 07:58 |  #38

With 1/250 on the giraffe you must be very happy @ 600 mm


A camera is a tool for learning how to see without a camera.
flickr (external link)https://www.flickr.com​/photos/97611076@N06/
https://500px.com/evel​akes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ from ­ PA
Cream of the Crop
7,826 posts
Likes: 441
Joined May 2003
Location: Southeast Pennsylvania
     
Oct 05, 2017 08:18 |  #39

Orias wrote in post #18466411 (external link)
Yeah, I agree! It's a LOT less forgiving than the Canon, but with the right conditions, it works really well.
My general hit-rate with the Canon lens was a lot better, but once I get used to this one, and get some more practise in, I'm sure the keeper rate will also go up.

Cheers

In making your statement, if you are comparing this to the Canon 70-300L mentioned in your original post, the 100-600 being less forgiving would almost be expected, especially at the long end. But that would be true of any 100-600 being compared, just due to the optics involved.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcoren
Senior Member
Avatar
399 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Likes: 151
Joined Mar 2015
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
     
Oct 06, 2017 07:27 |  #40

CheshireCat wrote in post #18463898 (external link)
As discussed in other threads, I am totally against the Sigma “have naive users spend more money for a dock product to fix lens production issues” mentality.
My money is perfectly working, so lenses must be perfectly working out of the box. Other users will disagree.

What do you think AF micro-adjust is? It's the same thing. The only difference is that Canon makes the bodies, so they can integrate the adjustment into the body firmware. The third parties can't do that to they need to sell a dock.

It's naive to think that Canon added AFMA as a "feature" to help pros optimize their lens performance. They did it so that they could reduce production costs by loosening tolerances, plain and simple. By adding AFMA, they shifted the burden to the lens buyer to make sure the AF system is properly aligned.


Canon EOS 7D Mark II, 7D, and 100 (film SLR)
Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM, EF-S 55-250mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM, EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM | C, 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM (non-C)
A backpack, a bicycle, and a pair of hiking boots

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
They have pills for that now you know.
Avatar
53,864 posts
Likes: 1480
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Oct 06, 2017 08:50 |  #41

mcoren wrote in post #18467121 (external link)
...It's naive to think that Canon added AFMA as a "feature" to help pros optimize their lens performance. They did it so that they could reduce production costs by loosening tolerances, plain and simple. By adding AFMA, they shifted the burden to the lens buyer to make sure the AF system is properly aligned.

I don't think Canon is loosening their tolerances any, lenses and cameras have always had some variance. MFA is just a tool photographers can use to fine tune the setup their gear for optimal performance. If I look at all my lenses, only one didn't require any MFA. All the others benefited from the feature. Most needed very little except for my 100-400 which needed a +10. Also, looking at my older lenses vs newer lenses, the variance is about the same so newer lenses do not seem to be more out of alignment than older ones.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 404
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
Post edited 6 months ago by CheshireCat. (4 edits in all)
     
Oct 06, 2017 10:41 |  #42

mcoren wrote in post #18467121 (external link)
It's naive to think that Canon added AFMA as a "feature" to help pros optimize their lens performance. They did it so that they could reduce production costs by loosening tolerances, plain and simple. By adding AFMA, they shifted the burden to the lens buyer to make sure the AF system is properly aligned.

It is a bit more complicated.

Originally, AFMA was intended to adjust sensor calibration issues with respect to the AF system. That was supposed to be a temporary workaround to use the lens until the body could be re-calibrated. Given the scope, one setting for AFMA was all you needed.

But then, users started using it to fix lens issues, which is improper usage because the AF system is a closed-loop and should always be able to converge to optimal focus (wide open).

So Canon expanded the AFMA functionality to have a per-lens adjustment, and now people are happy to use their defective lenses and bodies without sending them in for proper calibration.

Sigma followed suit with their dock, and some marketing BS convinced customers that paying extra money to “fix” defective lenses on your own is a super cool feature.
But wait, you actually have some features in the dock, such as limiting the focusing range... so when you see a bird far away - quick ! reprogram your lens firmware - so it will focus faster on it.


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
17,798 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 1559
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Oct 06, 2017 10:44 |  #43

CheshireCat wrote in post #18467229 (external link)
But wait, you actually have some features in the dock, such as limiting the focusing range... so when you see a bird far away - quick ! reprogram your lens firmware - so it will focus faster on it.

or just flick the switch on the side of the lens...


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)
my 366 for 2016 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 404
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
Post edited 6 months ago by CheshireCat. (2 edits in all)
     
Oct 06, 2017 10:48 |  #44

DreDaze wrote in post #18467230 (external link)
or just flick the switch on the side of the lens...

... if you have one.

EDIT: You will. Setting is only available if your lens has the “Custom Switch”.


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wizzells
Member
49 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 50
Joined Feb 2012
     
Oct 12, 2017 21:58 |  #45

Orias wrote in post #18466411 (external link)
Yeah, I agree! It's a LOT less forgiving than the Canon, but with the right conditions, it works really well.
My general hit-rate with the Canon lens was a lot better, but once I get used to this one, and get some more practise in, I'm sure the keeper rate will also go up.

Cheers

I just stumbled across this thread, but I had the exact same problem on my 70D. No matter how high I cranked up the shutter speed - as fast as 1/2000 at times - I had trouble getting a good keeper rate on this lens on the 70D, like it was getting motion blur or IS was trying to override even at high shutter speeds.
Interestingly, I started using it exclusively on my 6D and I've had zero of those same issues. Sure ya lose that "reach" on the full frame, but it works for my needs.

My keeper rate with a Canon 100-400L v2 was much better as well, but I consider that lens the benchmark for the class. Plus, at current street prices, I'd have to spend more than 2x what I paid for my Sigma and I cannot justify that right now.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

38,429 views & 9 likes for this thread
Is my Sigma 100-600 C Lens Faulty
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.0forum software
version 2.0 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is pno6854x
690 guests, 421 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.