Sigma 100-400

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18382852
I am sure it is fine for gliding birds, especially after it acquires initial focus. It is more the "oh a bird is diving to land in the water" and then wait for the lens to get a lock on that bird as you pan with it as it comes in. Canon does better here than Sigma.

Are we talking Canon original or II? Can you link to a review or something? I am thinking of selling my 100-400Lc and getting the Sigma (better IQ, lighter). I need the AF to perform at least as well as the old Canon.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18382852
I am sure it is fine for gliding birds, especially after it acquires initial focus. It is more the "oh a bird is diving to land in the water" and then wait for the lens to get a lock on that bird as you pan with it as it comes in. Canon does better here than Sigma.

I have no doubts Canon does better here than Sigma. The question is - is it better by $1000-$1400? Of course those who need that kind of focus will have to pay for the right tool for the job. But for most people an $800 lens would probably be good to very good.

Bassat wrote in post #18382878
Are we talking Canon original or II? Can you link to a review or something? I am thinking of selling my 100-400Lc and getting the Sigma (better IQ, lighter). I need the AF to perform at least as well as the old Canon.

I am talking more about the newer Canon lenses, they have started to add some sort of closed cycle communications that seems to help. Unsure about the old one, it was pretty good from what I remember, but Sigma might have caught up to that these days. The old 100-400L didn't have the best IQ at 400mm though, and I would expect you will really like the results of the Sigma over the MKI L.

Lbsimon wrote in post #18382881
I have no doubts Canon does better here than Sigma. The question is - is it better by $1000-$1400? Of course those who need that kind of focus will have to pay for the right tool for the job. But for most people an $800 lens would probably be good to very good.

Good question, one I am wrestling with. I can get the Canon for $1000 more with a 1 year warranty if I catch the refurb deals fast enough (almost pulled the trigger a week or two ago). I have a Sigma now as well, with more reach. I am stuck there too. Do I need blazing fast AF and instant lock, do I need 600mm, do I need $1000 in my account, or do I want something that can fit back into my bags and is easier to carry?

Based on all of this, I will probably just keep the 150-600, because I don't want to spend the $1000, but do want a lighter smaller lens, love the extra reach I have now, but also am pampered by Canon glass/AF systems on the L series. Why can't there be a 150-600 smaller lighter lens that costs $1000 and rivals the IQ of the Canon L, with great AF that works in almost every situation?

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18382884
I am talking more about the newer Canon lenses, they have started to add some sort of closed cycle communications that seems to help. Unsure about the old one, it was pretty good from what I remember, but Sigma might have caught up to that these days. The old 100-400L didn't have the best IQ at 400mm though, and I would expect you will really like the results of the Sigma over the MKI L.

Thanks for the quick reply. I am quite happy with my old 100-400L at 400mm, and every other focal length. The Sigma is appealing as an no/low-cost upgrade that gives me better IQ, and is smaller/lighter. I just don't want to give up the good-enough-for-me AF. My 100-400 is usually only deployed in bright sunshine, or at least good weather. That allows me to shoot at f/8 for IQ and still keep my shutter speed up where I like it, around 1/1000.

Bassat wrote in post #18382887
Thanks for the quick reply. I am quite happy with my old 100-400L at 400mm, and every other focal length. The Sigma is appealing as an no/low-cost upgrade that gives me better IQ, and is smaller/lighter. I just don't want to give up the good-enough-for-me AF. My 100-400 is usually only deployed in bright sunshine, or at least good weather. That allows me to shoot at f/8 for IQ and still keep my shutter speed up where I like it, around 1/1000.

I would put my 150-600 HSM AF as being pretty close to the 100-400Ls I have had in the past, so I suspect it would be a good upgrade for you. If you get it, please provide your feedback, I would be very interested.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18382888
I would put my 150-600 HSM AF as being pretty close to the 100-400Ls I have had in the past, so I suspect it would be a good upgrade for you. If you get it, please provide your feedback, I would be very interested.

Oops! 150-600 is too big for me. I thought we were on the Σ100-400.

Tried some fast moving subjects first time I tried with this kind of birds.

Those above are heavy cropped here is original

biggles2002 wrote in post #18382895
Those above are heavy cropped here is original

Hosted photo: posted by biggles2002 in
./showthread.php?p=183​82895&i=i137567743
forum: Canon Lenses

Hosted photo: posted by biggles2002 in
./showthread.php?p=183​82895&i=i13789561
forum: Canon Lenses

At that distance, you'd really have benefited from the 150-600. 640mm FOVCF or 960mm FOVCF Ah, the conundrum...smaller or more reach? I can't decide... Man that 1-4 $800 price sure is friendly to the wallet.

Nice to see the detail holds up on a large crop.

We are, I am confirming the sigma will probably be good for you.

ma11rats wrote in post #18382915
At that distance, you'd really have benefited from the 150-600. 640mm FOVCF or 960mm FOVCF Ah, the conundrum...smaller or more reach? I can't decide... Man that 1-4 $800 price sure is friendly to the wallet.

Nice to see the detail holds up on a large crop.

that's assuming that you can even keep the bird in the frame.... often, you may end up shooting so wide because the birds are moving too fast for your reaction. 600mm is pretty darn hard to track birds, it's hard enough to handhold even with IS.

Charlie wrote in post #18383042
that's assuming that you can even keep the bird in the frame.... often, you may end up shooting so wide because the birds are moving too fast for your reaction. 600mm is pretty darn hard to track birds, it's hard enough to handhold even with IS.

I hear that! On my 7d2, when I had the 400f5.6 on loan from CPS, I had a really hard time. I had a 1.4x attached and it was extremely hard to keep BIF in the viewfinder.

Size weight and IQ is what sigma wanted. They already have the 150-600 C and sport and also the 120-300 sport. Along with the 500 sport sigma is doing a heck of a job on their lineup.

There is not that much they lack and they still have industry firsts on many lenses.

I bet sigma kept having their designers wanting to do a regular 100-400 5.6 but the big bosses kept slamming down SMALLER WE WANT IT SMALLER

lol

https://youtu.be/41PvC​OZgpC4