Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Archive 2017 · New Sigma 100-400 C to complement Canon 100-400 II?

  
 
dtolios
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · New Sigma 100-400 C to complement Canon 100-400 II?


The issue is with the OP's premise: ppl already having EF-L 100-400 II, also getting this...would call it a tough one.

The 100-400 C in itself for sure has a market appeal, and could even divert ppl from getting the 100-400 II to begin with, but I would think very few would own more than one 100-400 for personal use.



Feb 21, 2017 at 03:08 PM
rabbitmountain
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · New Sigma 100-400 C to complement Canon 100-400 II?


jcolwell wrote:
Might be good option for travel, when the Canon 100-400L IS II is too big, but (i) we don't know how its IQ holds up (yet), and (ii) it's not all that much smaller than the Canon: weight, 1.2 kg vs. 1.6 kg (two-thirds); and length, 182mm vs. 193mm. The Sigma has a smaller front element (67mm vs. 77mm), but it looks like there's less than 10mm difference in max. diameters.


I think I would get the 70-300L for travel before the 1-4 siggy.



Feb 21, 2017 at 03:39 PM
rstoddard11
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · New Sigma 100-400 C to complement Canon 100-400 II?


This lens is basically a 70-300 with a 1.4 TC slapped on the front of it.

I would compare it directly with a Canon 70-300 consumer lens with teleconverter and see which one wins. Maybe the 70-300L. It probably falls in between the two.

I would not compare it to the 100-400 II. It will not compare and is a different class of lens.

I myself am in the market for a telephoto lens for landscapes and occasional wildlife and am waiting to see how it tests.



Feb 21, 2017 at 04:08 PM
technic
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · New Sigma 100-400 C to complement Canon 100-400 II?


rstoddard11 wrote:
This lens is basically a 70-300 with a 1.4 TC slapped on the front of it.

I would compare it directly with a Canon 70-300 consumer lens with teleconverter and see which one wins. Maybe the 70-300L. It probably falls in between the two.

I would not compare it to the 100-400 II. It will not compare and is a different class of lens.

I myself am in the market for a telephoto lens for landscapes and occasional wildlife and am waiting to see how it tests.


The MTF suggests that the Sigma 100-400 is NOT an average consumer lens when it comes to optics and probably quite close to the Canon 100-400 II. But yes, better wait for the tests because there are many properties that need to be seen in practice.

Of course these are different lenses, but people have different priorities (even when price is not an issue). And Sigma has shown with other lenses that they can sometimes beat Canon or Nikon top glass for a far lower price.



Feb 21, 2017 at 04:36 PM
jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · New Sigma 100-400 C to complement Canon 100-400 II?


dtolios wrote:
The issue is with the OP's premise: ppl already having EF-L 100-400 II, also getting this...would call it a tough one.

The 100-400 C in itself for sure has a market appeal, and could even divert ppl from getting the 100-400 II to begin with, but I would think very few would own more than one 100-400 for personal use.


For sure. I just figure that an EF-M version of a 100-400mm zoom would be quite a bit smaller than the Sigma C.

I have the EF 100-400L IS II, and I sometimes use it for travel. When I want to take less, it could be SL1 + EF-S, M3 + EF-M, and/or Fujifilm X, depending. I certainly would not buy an alternative 100-400mm full frame zoom for travel, unless it was a lot smaller than the Canon, and at least 'somewhat' smaller than the Sigma 100-400mm C.



Feb 21, 2017 at 05:40 PM
Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · New Sigma 100-400 C to complement Canon 100-400 II?


No not interested in the least. I have the 150-600C and it's a really good copy even sharp wide open. For birding 600mm is so much nicer even with crop or pixel challenged cameras like the 1DX. I travel with the 500II so the 150-600 or 100-400II are nothing to worry about and I can handhold the 1DX + 150-600 all day.


Feb 21, 2017 at 06:02 PM
AJSJones
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · New Sigma 100-400 C to complement Canon 100-400 II?


Link to Sigma MTFs


Feb 21, 2017 at 07:23 PM
dtolios
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · New Sigma 100-400 C to complement Canon 100-400 II?


jcolwell wrote:
For sure. I just figure that an EF-M version of a 100-400mm zoom would be quite a bit smaller than the Sigma C.

I have the EF 100-400L IS II, and I sometimes use it for travel. When I want to take less, it could be SL1 + EF-S, M3 + EF-M, and/or Fujifilm X, depending. I certainly would not buy an alternative 100-400mm full frame zoom for travel, unless it was a lot smaller than the Canon, and at least 'somewhat' smaller than the Sigma 100-400mm C.


Again, we don't dissagree, would be nice, but even for cropped bodies, everything but equiv. 35~40mm lenses end up being kinda big.

The Panasonic Vario-Elmar 100-400mm f/4-6.3 ASPH. O.I.S, a m43 lens, is also 985gr. & Approx. 3.27 x 6.75" (83 x 171.5 mm).

Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM C (FF) = 1160gr & Approx. 3.40 x 7.18" (86.4 x 182.3 mm).

Not much to be saved there...apparently.



Feb 21, 2017 at 07:48 PM
Jeff Nolten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · New Sigma 100-400 C to complement Canon 100-400 II?


For now its either the 100-400 or the 55-250. I was disappointed that the new 70-300 didn't turn out better. A lighter EF-S (not necessarily Canon) >= 300 would be a nice addition. By lighter, I'm thinking around 2 lbs. In the mean time I'll just have to cope.


Feb 21, 2017 at 08:07 PM
jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · New Sigma 100-400 C to complement Canon 100-400 II?


dtolios wrote:
Again, we don't dissagree, would be nice, but even for cropped bodies, everything but equiv. 35~40mm lenses end up being kinda big.


There's lots of small telephoto lenses with excellent IQ, but most of them are manual focus.




Feb 21, 2017 at 08:18 PM
alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · New Sigma 100-400 C to complement Canon 100-400 II?


rabbitmountain wrote:
I think I would get the 70-300L for travel before the 1-4 siggy.


You are touching one of the really interesting questions here. Many have been torn between the 70-300 L and the 100-400 II. The new Sigma falls nicely in between and will hopefully be an attractive option for many.

Personally, having the 100-400 II, and being seriously affected by GAS, I got a 70-300 II (non-L) for lighter use.

The 70-300 IS USM II (non-L) is a well-rounded lens with a well rounded image quality at all settings and no glaring weakness. The sharpness is not L grade (it is similar to the 24-105 F4 L IS II which is not an L grade lens either IMO), but contrast and CA is right up there. It has one great strength, the sharpness is optimized for 300 mm wide open. Where other 70-300 mm lenses fall short beyond 200mm, this one just gets better. Judging by the MTF of the new Sigma 100-400 C, it has adopted the same philosophy. Many people buy these lenses for wide open use at the longest focal length.




Feb 22, 2017 at 03:03 AM
1      
2
       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.