Sigma 150-600mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sport or Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM?

[QUOTE=basketballfreak​6;17619996]i think either lens are amazing, all depends on what you're after i guess

i have no doubt the 100-400II will have the best iq and af, but to be frank i think my sigma 150-600 sports is plenty sharp wide open and af is dead accurate, not as fast as some of the best lenses out there but imho accuracy it's easily as good as my 24-70II and 70-200II

got this only a while ago, 1/50 shutter speed handheld @600mm

QUOTE]

Agree BBF6, cant go wrong with either, and yes wide open still nice sharp images.

I read where some said f8 is sharp, but I shot at various f stops checking things out, and have no complaints with wide open, plus I much prefer WO for DOF

[QUOTE=Roy C;17620021]David here are some samples of the Sigma 150-600 C taken with a 1.4x tc all at the full 840mm to give you an idea of the IQ.]


Roy which TC did you use Canon or Sigma, and which specific model

[QUOTE=Bianchi;1762033​2]

basketballfreak6 wrote in post #17619996
i think either lens are amazing, all depends on what you're after i guess

i have no doubt the 100-400II will have the best iq and af, but to be frank i think my sigma 150-600 sports is plenty sharp wide open and af is dead accurate, not as fast as some of the best lenses out there but imho accuracy it's easily as good as my 24-70II and 70-200II

got this only a while ago, 1/50 shutter speed handheld @600mm

QUOTE]

Agree BBF6, cant go wrong with either, and yes wide open still nice sharp images.

I read where some said f8 is sharp, but I shot at various f stops checking things out, and have no complaints with wide open, plus I much prefer WO for DOF

definitely perfectly useable sharp wide open

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/vhFt​YZ

basketballfreak6 wrote in post #17620315
yea sigma lenses are cheap in australia for some reason, i picked up my 150-600 during sale (10% off $1899), i remember the 100-400II released here at ~$2700

now price difference not as bad tho, ~$400 difference (the sigma went up $300 since release lol)

Yes, that's why this can be a harder decision here in the US where the Sport and 100-400L II are about the same cost. OTOH I lean towards the 100-400L II on sheer size factor - it's obviously easier to hand-hold, but if I can get reasonably sharpish shots @840mm on a 7D II from the Sport with a 1.4x, then that would tip the scales.

And Roy C's shots with the C @ 840mm look pretty impressive and if there isn't much IQ difference between the two, then the C starts looking appealing for a whole lot less $$$ and weight.

Tough choices, but really good choices!

[QUOTE=basketballfreak​6;17620339][QUOTE=Bian​chi;17620332]

definitely perfectly useable sharp wide open ]


I hear ya and fill ya brother

Roy C wrote in post #17620021
David here are some samples of the Sigma 150-600 C taken with a 1.4x tc all at the full 840mm to give you an idea of the IQ.

IMAGE LINK: http://i130.photobucke​t.com …%201200px_zpsli​iloa65.jpg on photobucket

IMAGE LINK: http://i130.photobucke​t.com …1%20840mm_zps1q​0pqke7.jpg on photobucket

IMAGE LINK: http://i130.photobucke​t.com …t%20840mm_zpsch​0z7gno.jpg on photobucket

Roy, those look terrific. What camera were these shot with?

David Arbogast wrote in post #17620343
Yes, that's why this can be a harder decision here in the US where the Sport and 100-400L II are about the same cost. OTOH I lean towards the 100-400L II on sheer size factor - it's obviously easier to hand-hold, but if I can get reasonably sharpish shots @840mm on a 7D II from the Sport with a 1.4x, then that would tip the scales.

And Roy C's shots with the C @ 840mm look pretty impressive and if there isn't much IQ difference between the two, then the C starts looking appealing for a whole lot less $$$ and weight.

Tough choices, but really good choices!

yea i can definitely understand the draw of the 100-400II - (comparatively) light weight and compact, great IQ and AF

in saying that now that i've spent time with the sigma 150-600 sports i can walkabout handheld for hours no issues just on my r-strap, there are definitely times that i wish the lens could be lighter but handholding is definitely not a problem with this lens and i am a pretty small dude

you saw that scarlett honeyeater i even managed to shoot it 1/50 @600mm lol

David Arbogast wrote in post #17620343
Yes, that's why this can be a harder decision here in the US where the Sport and 100-400L II are about the same cost. OTOH I lean towards the 100-400L II on sheer size factor - it's obviously easier to hand-hold, but if I can get reasonably sharpish shots @840mm on a 7D II from the Sport with a 1.4x, then that would tip the scales.

And Roy C's shots with the C @ 840mm look pretty impressive and if there isn't much IQ difference between the two, then the C starts looking appealing for a whole lot less $$$ and weight.

Tough choices, but really good choices!

I put a call into Sigma tech when I was ready to purchase, had a few questions, and a bit confused about the C&S as it just came on the market.. The tech an older gentleman and very product knowledgeable asked me a few questions, will you be shooting in a snow blizzards, or torrential rains, my answer was no, he said then I suggest the C . I then said are you sure, I want the sharpest, he said you will see no difference in sharpness. The S is for Pros who will be out in all kind of elements.

So depending where you fit in, make your choice

I have a close friend who owns a high end camera store, sells lecia, zeiss, canon, tamron, sigma etc.. I had asked him his opinion of the C vs the S, his answer was less CA in the S. That was it, except for of course the weather sealing and weight. One click in LR resolves CA

basketballfreak6 wrote in post #17619996
i think either lens are amazing, all depends on what you're after i guess

i have no doubt the 100-400II will have the best iq and af, but to be frank i think my sigma 150-600 sports is plenty sharp wide open and af is dead accurate, not as fast as some of the best lenses out there but imho accuracy it's easily as good as my 24-70II and 70-200II

got this only a while ago, 1/50 shutter speed handheld @600mm

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/uBdv​7J Scarlett Honeyeater by Tony, on Flickr

plus a couple more on recent outing:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/v2fS​6r Brown Honeyeater by Tony, on Flickr

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/v1uk​zf Double-Barred Finch by Tony, on Flickr

all @600mm wide open on my 5D3

Man, do I envy you! You have such beautiful birds where you live!

Lbsimon wrote in post #17620532
Man, do I envy you! You have such beautiful birds where you live!

Thanks mate we are very lucky in Brisbane have parks and reserves etc everywhere the place I shot the Scarlett Honeyeater is only down the road from me and that reserve has over 100 species of bird sighting as is!

so - does the C version also allow you to use the sigma dock?
i thought that it was for the S solely?

for those of you who have the sigma (all versions)
which extender (if any) do you use?
does it play nice with the canon version 3s
or should one plan to get the upper level sigma extenders?

ceriltheblade wrote in post #17622234
so - does the C version also allow you to use the sigma dock?
i thought that it was for the S solely?

for those of you who have the sigma (all versions)
which extender (if any) do you use?
does it play nice with the canon version 3s
or should one plan to get the upper level sigma extenders?

Dock settings for the C is exactly the same as with the S.
I do not know about Canon MkIII extenders but the C works very well with my Canon 1.4x MkII. From what I have seen the Canon extenders work better than Sigma ones although I have not tried the Sigma one myself.

basketballfreak6 wrote in post #17620098
Roy do you have issues with TC + lens combo having focusing issues?

No issues, considering it is at f9 to start with it focuses extremely well on both my 5D3 and 7D2. I would say it is equally as fast as the 400/5.6 + 1.4x tc.
AF is obviously slower than the bare lens - being very roughly at the required focusing distance and/or using a focus limiter helps a lot with AF speed of course.

Here are a few more samples taken with the 150-600 C all taken at 600mm. I can see no reason to buy the Sport over the C unless you want the extra weather sealing. If you are a pro shooter or likely to shoot in all weathers then the Sport would be the best bet.

IMAGE LINK: http://i130.photobucke​t.com …llow%2001_zpsmh​tkus8e.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://i130.photobucke​t.com …20flight1_zpsvg​mr3hyr.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://i130.photobucke​t.com …C/Robin01_zpsfk​jnevbm.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://i130.photobucke​t.com …C/stone02_zpswf​pcsleq.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://i130.photobucke​t.com …%20robin2_zpstf​si3tb4.jpg

Roy C wrote in post #17622257
No issues, considering it is at f9 to start with it focuses extremely well on both my 5D3 and 7D2. I would say it is equally as fast as the 400/5.6 + 1.4x tc.
AF is obviously slower than the bare lens - being very roughly at the required focusing distance and/or using a focus limiter helps a lot with AF speed of course.

thanks mate, yea i can't understand why my lens is behaving the way it does with the TC attached when bare lens is perfect, frustrating as i am a bit reluctant sending everything away lol