Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
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 11 Jul 2008 (Friday) 19:17
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Mini-Review of the Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400L

 
brecklundin
Goldmember
Avatar
2,179 posts
Joined Jun 2008
     
Jul 13, 2008 04:39 |  #46

condyk wrote in post #5901286 (external link)
It has a panning mode.

Seriously? I missed that feature...hmmm...maybe I don't need to pay Mom's convalescent care bill this month after all...think it's a valid trade off?


Real men shoot Pentax because we're born with our own Canon's!!
{Ok...ok, some of use just have a PnS but it it always makes me happy! :D}
Pentax K5, K20D, Three Amigos (Pentax FA 31/1.8 Limited Silver, Pentax FA 43/1.9 Limited Silver, Pentax FA 77/1.8 Limited Silver), Pentax DA 35mm F2.8 Macro Limited, Sigma 24-60/2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
TeamSpeed
THREAD ­ STARTER
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,639 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6281
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jul 13, 2008 07:00 |  #47

Okay, per requests I shot a couple different items with the 100-400+Kenko 1.4x and the Sigma 150-500. I shot in Av mode, and let the camera determine white balance and exposure. I notice a couple of things still, just like before.

1) Sunlight throws off the color through the lens, the Canon yields a better white balance, fixable if you shoot RAW after the fact
2) The 100-400 with a TC is pretty good, but I have already determined that my 100-400 w/TCs seems to work very well in the past too.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
THREAD ­ STARTER
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,639 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6281
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jul 13, 2008 07:02 |  #48

Longer distance test shot (100-400 + non-reporting TC vs Sigma), Canon on top, Sigma on the bottom. Both are at f8 (f5.6 w/1.4x on Canon, f8 on Sigma).


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



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


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
THREAD ­ STARTER
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,639 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6281
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jul 13, 2008 07:04 |  #49

Shorter distance test shot (100-400 + non-reporting TC vs Sigma, both at f/8), Canon on top, Sigma on the bottom.


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



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


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
liquidstone
insane Bird photographer
Avatar
1,088 posts
Likes: 102
Joined Dec 2005
     
Jul 13, 2008 07:24 |  #50

Hi TS, just to clarify, the 100-400 + 1.4x is already f/8 wide open at 560 mm..... please explain how both can be at f/6.3.

Thanks,

Romy


Romy Ocon, Philippine Wild Birds (external link)
Over 260 species captured in habitat, and counting.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
THREAD ­ STARTER
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,639 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6281
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jul 13, 2008 07:25 |  #51

I thought I would add the 2x to the 100-400. No sunlight on the swingset, so I didn't do that one, just the rooftop.


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


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SOT
I make up stuff about Cameras
915 posts
Joined Oct 2007
     
Jul 13, 2008 07:32 |  #52

I am curious, in some of the crops, the actual crop location chosen doesn't seem to be the actual focus point. Was that done intentionally?


http://img81.imageshac​k.us/img81/8646/captur​e1o.jpg (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mrklaw
Senior Member
678 posts
Joined Jan 2006
     
Jul 13, 2008 07:40 as a reply to  @ SOT's post |  #53

wow, thanks for quick response.

I'm pretty impressed by the 100-400 + TC. Certainly seems to be within a simlar threshold that the sigma on its own was against the 100-400 on its own - i.e I'd probably not notice the difference on normal shots.

that 2x is even more impressive. No idea how you got focus, but that looks pretty good.


_______________

no dear, it didn't cost much at all

my stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
THREAD ­ STARTER
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,639 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6281
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jul 13, 2008 07:44 |  #54

SOT wrote in post #5901705 (external link)
I am curious, in some of the crops, the actual crop location chosen doesn't seem to be the actual focus point. Was that done intentionally?

If you are talking about the address stone tests, I was very close to the focus point and at the distance/flatness of the target, the crop would still be in focus area, especially at f5.6 and f6.3. The DOF is not so thin as to not take that into consideration. If you don't like the crops, there are links to the full sized jpg files, you can see that the entire wall basically is in focus, but I made sure I was very near the AF point with the crops.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
THREAD ­ STARTER
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,639 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6281
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jul 13, 2008 07:49 |  #55

liquidstone wrote in post #5901676 (external link)
Hi TS, just to clarify, the 100-400 + 1.4x is already f/8 wide open at 560 mm..... please explain how both can be at f/6.3.

Thanks,

Romy

Sorry I meant to say the Canon was at f5.6 not 6.3 only because of the non-reporting TC (exif will show 5.6 but really at f8 ). I have 6.3 on the brain because of the Sigma. I guess I should have moved the Sigma up to f8. I could redo these tests with the Sigma at f8, but we know it will be a tad sharper at f8 due to the other tests and what others have found.

Stay tuned, I will reshoot the last two so they are both at f8 and repost over the originals.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
THREAD ­ STARTER
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,639 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6281
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jul 13, 2008 07:50 |  #56

mrklaw wrote in post #5901726 (external link)
wow, thanks for quick response.

I'm pretty impressed by the 100-400 + TC. Certainly seems to be within a simlar threshold that the sigma on its own was against the 100-400 on its own - i.e I'd probably not notice the difference on normal shots.

that 2x is even more impressive. No idea how you got focus, but that looks pretty good.

The MKIII will allow AF with a taped Kenko if there is enough light. The TC does not report back.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
liquidstone
insane Bird photographer
Avatar
1,088 posts
Likes: 102
Joined Dec 2005
     
Jul 13, 2008 08:04 |  #57

TeamSpeed wrote in post #5901754 (external link)
Sorry I meant to say the Canon was at f5.6 not 6.3 only because of the non-reporting TC (exif will show 5.6 but really at f8 ). I have 6.3 on the brain because of the Sigma. I guess I should have moved the Sigma up to f8. I could redo these tests with the Sigma at f8, but we know it will be a tad sharper at f8 due to the other tests and what others have found.

Stay tuned, I will reshoot the last two so they are both at f8 and repost over the originals.

Thanks, TS.... so both were shot wide open - 560 mm f/8 for the 100-400 vs 500 f/6.3 for the 150-500 OS. Looks to me the IQ of the 100-400 + 1.4x is similar or slightly better than the bare Sigma?

Romy


Romy Ocon, Philippine Wild Birds (external link)
Over 260 species captured in habitat, and counting.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
THREAD ­ STARTER
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,639 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6281
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jul 13, 2008 08:15 |  #58

liquidstone wrote in post #5901807 (external link)
Thanks, TS.... so both were shot wide open - 560 mm f/8 for the 100-400 vs 500 f/6.3 for the 150-500 OS. Looks to me the IQ of the 100-400 + 1.4x is similar or slightly better than the bare Sigma?

Romy

I redid these so they are both at f8, and at this point the Sigma is a tiny bit better, at least from my perspective. However I think I have a freaky 100-400, because it really seems to work well with the 1.4x and 2x. I could almost leave the 2x on the 100-400 and shoot it all the time during sunny days.

But I agree, that my particular copy of the 100-400 and the 1.4x does still seem to have just the tiniest bit better IQ than the Sigma wide open, but they are so very close at that point. Stop the Sigma down to f8, and it really starts to shine.

I think the most accurate statement I can make on the Sigma is that it is hard to beat the Sigma at the price point when you shoot at 500mm at f8, combined with its OS. Great performance at this sweet point on the lens...

Not making my decision very easy... :(


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
condyk
Africa's #1 Tour Guide
Avatar
20,886 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Birmingham, UK
     
Jul 13, 2008 08:27 |  #59

liquidstone wrote in post #5901807 (external link)
TLooks to me the IQ of the 100-400 + 1.4x is similar or slightly better than the bare Sigma?

Cool, so I can spend £1147 on the Canon combo with 2 stop OS or £695 on the Sigma with four stop OS and get pretty much the same results ... and with auton-focus :lol::lol:


https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1203740

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
THREAD ­ STARTER
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,639 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6281
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jul 13, 2008 08:45 |  #60

After doing this last test, I figure why shoot the Sigma at f8, why not slap the 1.4x on it and be a little slower but with more reach. The results were decent for f9 at 700mm. I'm off to church, will check in later for any final requests!


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



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


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

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

74,340 views & 0 likes for this thread
Mini-Review of the Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400L
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?
Register to forums
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 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Nick Lamendola
836 guests, 303 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

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.