ekimvenes
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.11 #20 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!) | |
nicephore wrote:
@nandadevieast@ : I am not sure if many forum readers would have both lenses and could compare these directly.
Dustin Abbott and Gordon Laing have done comparisons and, in terms of sharpness, these 2 lenses are very close.
I think the main differences are : 1/ AF performance (GM is superior, although, according to Dustin Abbott, FE version of Sigma is now much snappier than the DSLR version)
2/ Teleconverter (support or lack of)
3/ Minimum focus distance (GM has an edge here)
Whether these 3 topics do matter for your photography type is what's important but IMHO I don't see sharpness being a big differentiator in this case.
FWIW, I've tested the Sigma 100-400 at small distance and it's very close to the Voigtlander 110 (I've found that the Sigma had more vivid colors).
I've not done yet shots at infinity so cannot comment on this (but Gordon and Dustin did).
The GM has also a slight better build quality (not a top criteria for me as this Sigma - while not labelled "Art" - is well-enough built)....Show more →
I've recently acquired this lens and as an amateur I'm quite satisfied with its optical performance, handling, weight and overall looks. When I was considering whether to go with 2x times dearer Sony GM lens or this recently introduced Sigma, after reading some reviews online (the 2 main sources you've mentioned already and after comparing pros and cons I came back to the start point - and the main reason many others like myself who shoot for fun, joy and even semi-professional/serious enough goals might choose Sigma instead - and this very start (an end) point is the PRICE. Yes, the price is the main decisive factor in play here IMHO. I spent $1000, but saved another grand to be spent for the Sony 24-105mm G lens in the near future.
Naturally, if the budget allows it, go and grab Sony 100-400mm GM, hands down long term better alternative, mostly if you plan to use it as a professional in different kind of environments. But is it $1000 better than Sigma, especially optically? I don't think it is. If the overall difference was perhaps in realm of somewhere under $500, I'd be thinking very hard which glass to choose. Anyway, performance-cost ratio is a winner in case of Sigma, as simple as that. I have also 5 year warranty running with it, so that's a nice bonus added as well
Perhaps the only downside I could observe so far is the already mentioned (by some other users in the thread) slight humming inside the lens when OS is on (be it setting 1 or 2), even when the lens doesn't do anything. Can be heard with ear glued to the lens. Couldn't see any extra battery drain after a few sessions though. The lack of tripod collar is not an obstacle for my use in landscape scenarios, since I use somewhat cumbersome, but very useful gadget that helps to keep the lens very stable (with OS off while sitting on a sturdy tripod), it's called Andoer L200 Telephoto Lens Support. When shooting handheld (small birds, insects. plants, etc.), Sigma is easy enough to handle and use, too.
Anyway, in the end Sigma 100-400mm DG DN is a very capable piece of glass and surely will find its place amongst many happy shooters out there And if Tamron can surprise us with their similar range oriented lens in the near future, the choice will become even more interesting!
|
: