sigma 150-600

I am on the fence I love landscape and wildlife/sports and would like to get a 6D for landscape but I also want the new Sigma 150-600 to pair with my 7D version 1. The million dollar question I'm sure I would love both however I can only buy one, which should it be?

I need some different perspectives, please share some. The lenses I have are; 28-135kit,Sigma 8-16,canon 10-22, 85mm 1.8 and the 100-400l

Since you have the 100-400, I'd go with the 6D rather than the new glass.

archer1960, How do you like your Tamzooka?

jlstan wrote in post #17296686
archer1960, How do you like your Tamzooka?

I love it. It's not the fastest focusing lens out there, but part of that is due to the body it's on (T1i), and using the focus range limiter and shooting at a shorter f/l speed it up significantly. For the price you can't beat it, though if you want to spend twice as much or more, there are better lenses.

jlstan wrote in post #17296678
I am on the fence I love landscape and wildlife/sports and would like to get a 6D for landscape but I also want the new Sigma 150-600 to pair with my 7D version 1. The million dollar question I'm sure I would love both however I can only buy one, which should it be?

I need some different perspectives, please share some. The lenses I have are; 28-135kit,Sigma 8-16,canon 10-22, 85mm 1.8 and the 100-400l

This is easy. Sell the EF 100-400mm and buy the Siggy. You certainly have the WA end covered. You will have range covered from 8mm to 600mm. Not too shabby.

IMHO, the 6D is not as good as the 7D. On a 7D the 600mm Sigma will look like nearly 1000mm. That is a real telephoto!

ebiggs wrote in post #17297451
This is easy. Sell the EF 100-400mm and buy the Siggy. You certainly have the WA end covered. You will have range covered from 8mm to 600mm. Not too shabby.

IMHO, the 6D is not as good as the 7D. On a 7D the 600mm Sigma will look like nearly 1000mm. That is a real telephoto!

I wonder if the 7D ii with the 1.4x and 100-400 would be any good seeing the 7D ii will auto focus to F8. I still am drooling over the Sigma though

In a situation like this what I would do is not buy antyhing until I'm pretty sure which one I choose. I guess it's possible that you never really know for sure... but this has never happened yet...

jlstan wrote in post #17298163
I wonder if the 7D ii with the 1.4x and 100-400 would be any good seeing the 7D ii will auto focus to F8.

I don't like tele converters. Although I have a couple, I would rather have a real 600mm than a converted 560mm. And all my cameras focus to f8.

consider u can't use the 10-22 on the 6D. when i got my 1D4 i noticed the 100-400 was focusing really FASTER, priceless for birding & sports.
but my heart was bleeding, thinkin i can't use longer that little jewel for landscapes, on the bigger sensor..

The real question is when do you expect the siggy 150-600 to land? Christmas?

Christmas 2015 hehe

How true!

If you get the 6D for landscapes and need an UWA, you also need to put up another $1200 for the 16-35 f4IS to make it really worthwhile. Otherwise IMHO you won't be gaining that much unless you are doing night photography or the like.

I went FF for landscapes mainly so I could use the TS-E 17mm and I was also doing indoor high ISO stuff. Otherwise, your splitting hairs between a crop and the 10-22 and FF and the 17-40 or 16-35 f2.8's. Same with the 28-135. It's probably sharper in the corners on a crop anyway and at ISO100 you're just not gaining that much. Now is you were going to go FF AND get a 24-70 II or something, that would be a different story.

Bottom line: for landscapes (typically) glass really matters for high IQ and probably more than body.

I still regularly take my 7D + 10-22 out hiking for weight reasons and have never been unhappy with the prints I got.

I scrapped the 6D thought not enough gains for what I like to shoot.

Anyone ever received this lens?
Need to decide between Sig and Tam...I know I have to wait for either one. Siggy will be much longer wait than Tammy.