p.19 #1 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
-LYS- wrote:
I've tried and I'm not thrilled but since I'm new to this I always assume it's user error. Will be curious what you think after you rent the GM.
Thanks, that's also why I'm asking as I've never shot before at such long focal length so I'm not sure what exactly to expect...
p.19 #3 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
I just got my Sigma 100-400DN a few days ago. I I’ve only done brief testing to see if my lens wasn’t a dud. It’s very hot here at the moment so hard to test in the heat.
I’ve tested it against my Canon 200mm 2.8 II and no surprise the Canon is sharper. It’s a very good prime. The Sigma is sharper than the Sony 70-200/4 I’ve once had, which wasn’t a great lens. I’ll test it against my VC 110/2.5 APO.
I have no other lenses over 200mm, but it seemed very respectable at 400mm. So I’m happy with it. I’d have no problem using mine for landscape at infinity on my A7R3. But it certainly won’t replace my primes for panos etc.a
p.19 #4 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
TakenWild wrote:
J4nu,
Hard to tell sharpness from these photos. Am I seeing the zoomed in ones at 1:1? And what camera are you using?
Thanks, these are whole pictures, just scaled to 1600x1067 (except the ones showing AF points, which are simply cropped from 100%).
... but you're right, I should have posted crops as that's more readable. I'll try to do that tomorrow, for now it's possible to click on the link saying DSCXXX, which should open the full picture on flickr (if I didn't mess anything up ), e.g. DSC06709
p.19 #5 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
TakenWild wrote:
I just got my Sigma 100-400DN a few days ago. I I’ve only done brief testing to see if my lens wasn’t a dud. It’s very hot here at the moment so hard to test in the heat.
I’ve tested it against my Canon 200mm 2.8 II and no surprise the Canon is sharper. It’s a very good prime. The Sigma is sharper than the Sony 70-200/4 I’ve once had, which wasn’t a great lens. I’ll test it against my VC 110/2.5 APO.
I have no other lenses over 200mm, but it seemed very respectable at 400mm. So I’m happy with it. I’d have no problem using mine for landscape at infinity on my A7R3. But it certainly won’t replace my primes for panos etc.a...Show more →
Yeah, I'm not expecting GM400 IQ either but I can't tell if it's shooting evironment (haze, hot air, etc.) or sth wrong with my copy or it's normal to see some lost details in this kind of shots. I'm generally very happy with this lens for its price and size/weight.
However, I use it rather only on special occasions (I'm mostly a prime family shooter, so I rarely go beyond 100mm) and when I do use it I notice this difference in IQ between 400mm close focus vs far away (in general I think 100-300 range is a bit sharper, but I also think that's normal for such zooms).
I'm shooting on A7III btw.
And thanks for your response again .
p.19 #6 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
I don't have easy access to an example right now, but I've shot numerous desert landscapes at 400mm and long focus distances with the Sigma this winter on the a7r iii and wouldn't hesitate to do so again - the size/weight advantage of the Sigma is hard to give up when carrying it on longer hikes especially
p.19 #7 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
j4nu wrote:
Yeah, I'm not expecting GM400 IQ either but I can't tell if it's shooting evironment (haze, hot air, etc.) or sth wrong with my copy or it's normal to see some lost details in this kind of shots. I'm generally very happy with this lens for its price and size/weight.
However, I use it rather only on special occasions (I'm mostly a prime family shooter, so I rarely go beyond 100mm) and when I do use it I notice this difference in IQ between 400mm close focus vs far away (in general I think 100-300 range is a bit sharper, but I also think that's normal for such zooms).
I'm shooting on A7III btw.
And thanks for your response again ....Show more →
I recently read a review that stated the Sigma was optimized for the long end, actually beating the GM in sharpness at 400mm.
p.19 #8 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
j4nu wrote:
Thanks, these are whole pictures, just scaled to 1600x1067 (except the ones showing AF points, which are simply cropped from 100%).
... but you're right, I should have posted crops as that's more readable. I'll try to do that tomorrow, for now it's possible to click on the link saying DSCXXX, which should open the full picture on flickr (if I didn't mess anything up ), e.g. DSC06709
Maybe shoot something flat like a sign so you can easily see what's going on. Shooting at a distance is hard. I have been thinking of getting this lens. Here is my example from Canon 300mm f2.8 on my A7rIV. 20201228_Livermore_0026 by Vishi A, on Flickr
p.19 #9 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
chez wrote:
I recently read a review that stated the Sigma was optimized for the long end, actually beating the GM in sharpness at 400mm.
That's exactly what Dustin Abbott has reported in his reviews as far as I do recall (in his review of the DSLR version vs Canon model which Dustin considered at that time to be the benchmark for DSLRs 100-400, the Sigma was competing neck to neck with the Canon) .
Since I own this lens (Sigma 100-400 DN) myself, I've shot few landscapes with this lens beyond 300mm and in the few shots at 300mm and 400mm, I didn't notice any weakness.
Gordon Laing has also compared the Sigma and the Sony GM and I recall that both performances at infinity were really close (main differentiator was the closed focus distance)
p.19 #10 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
nicephore wrote:
That's exactly what Dustin Abbott has reported in his reviews as far as I do recall (in his review of the DSLR version vs Canon model which Dustin considered at that time to be the benchmark for DSLRs 100-400, the Sigma was competing neck to neck with the Canon) .
Since I own this lens (Sigma 100-400 DN) myself, I've shot few landscapes with this lens beyond 300mm and in the few shots at 300mm and 400mm, I didn't notice any weakness.
Gordon Laing has also compared the Sigma and the Sony GM and I recall that both performances at infinity were really close (main differentiator was the closed focus distance)...Show more →
That's great to hear, seems like the ultimate hiking telephoto landscape lens.
p.19 #11 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
Eruditass wrote:
That's great to hear, seems like the ultimate hiking telephoto landscape lens.
Sadly that's more or less the only clearly defined use-case. Because of the lack of TCs, lack of shipped-with tripod collar, minimum focus distance and slightly slower max aperture the Sigma has some limits uses.
p.19 #12 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
The lack of a shipped with tripod collar is very easy to fix. Buy the optional one that Sigma makes for the lens, and it even includes a built in arca swiss foot (unlike Sony tripod collars)!
p.19 #13 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
nicephore wrote:
That's exactly what Dustin Abbott has reported in his reviews as far as I do recall (in his review of the DSLR version vs Canon model which Dustin considered at that time to be the benchmark for DSLRs 100-400, the Sigma was competing neck to neck with the Canon) .
Since I own this lens (Sigma 100-400 DN) myself, I've shot few landscapes with this lens beyond 300mm and in the few shots at 300mm and 400mm, I didn't notice any weakness.
Gordon Laing has also compared the Sigma and the Sony GM and I recall that both performances at infinity were really close (main differentiator was the closed focus distance)...Show more →
Yes, I remember reading that review too. However, les numeriques: https://www.lesnumeriques.com/zooms/sigma-100-400mm-f5-6-3-dg-dn-os-p58333/test.html
reports differently and it matches my experience more...
Unfortunately, I don't have much of that experience to know who is right...
It's reassuring though, that you're happy with your sigma on the long end at infinity. Thanks!
Thanks, your shot looks definitely sharper (especially across the whole frame) than mine (excluding all the other factors, it's a prime vs zoom and a high res body though ).
I'll try more controlled shots...
p.19 #15 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
j4nu wrote:
Thanks, your shot looks definitely sharper (especially across the whole frame) than mine (excluding all the other factors, it's a prime vs zoom and a high res body though ).
I'll try more controlled shots...
You closeup shots were good. Try shooting early mornings when less atmospheric haze and heat and something a flat target. I would go at wide open and f8 too. To me all these zooms are f8 lenses. Currently I only have Tamron 28-200 but want to get something longer and don't want to spend money on the 100-400GM.
p.19 #16 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
On the contrary I think this lens more significantly limits the use case of the Sony GM lens. Considering one can pick up a new Sigma for far less than GMs go for USED, the clearly defined user base for the Sony are:
1. Those who need reach beyond 400mm
2. More reliable AF on moving subjects
3. Those who are inconvenienced by having to pay for a lens foot, but don't need an quick release plate... who are these people!?
4. Those who will miss 1/3 a stop across a portion of the focal range
That leaves quite a good portion of the user base I'd estimate that will look at the two and say the Sigma is small, lighter and 50% cheaper and will give me 90% of what the GM has to offer.
I have no doubt the GM is the better overall lens, but what am I missing?
zz wrote:
Sadly that's more or less the only clearly defined use-case. Because of the lack of TCs, lack of shipped-with tripod collar, minimum focus distance and slightly slower max aperture the Sigma has some limits uses.
p.19 #17 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
kroyston wrote:
On the contrary I think this lens more significantly limits the use case of the Sony GM lens. Considering one can pick up a new Sigma for far less than GMs go for USED, the clearly defined user base for the Sony are:
1. Those who need reach beyond 400mm
2. More reliable AF on moving subjects
3. Those who are inconvenienced by having to pay for a lens foot, but don't need an quick release plate... who are these people!?
4. Those who will miss 1/3 a stop across a portion of the focal range
That leaves quite a good portion of the user base I'd estimate that will look at the two and say the Sigma is small, lighter and 50% cheaper and will give me 90% of what the GM has to offer.
I have no doubt the GM is the better overall lens, but what am I missing?
No lies told. Every lens is a compromise. For me, the Sigma was the much better alternative given the price, size, and weight. I agree that the tripod collar argument is moot since the Sony one isn't Arca Swiss. And even though I bought the Sigma collar, I haven't used it once on a tripod because the lens is so light.
The only thing that would sway me towards the Sony is the min focus distance; that seems very useful, but I have other lenses that can achieve that.
p.19 #18 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
My experience with a similar lens - an adapted Canon 70-300mm f4-f5.6 IS L is that you need to use a tripod collar and full electronic (silent) shutter to get the sharpest possible images for infinity focus for focal lengths longer than 200mm. I've used this lens for 1 1/2 years now on an A7RIII and A7RIV. I only recently started using electronic shutter for tripod landscapes - before that I used EFCS with a wired shutter release. . . . Using full electronic (silent) shutter has been an eye-opener. I previously thought the lens' sharpness degraded after 200mm; I was wrong. TUsing full electronic (silent) shutter, I now realize that there was camera shake even on a very good tripod and using the tripod collar when I was using EFCS. I don't think it matters how fast your shutter speed is. If you want consistently sharp landscape images at infinity with longer lenses on a very high resolution body like the A7RIV, I think you need to use a tripod and full electronic shutter. This was not nearly as much of an issue on the A7RIII; so I assume the difference is the higher megapixel body.
p.19 #19 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
zz wrote:
Sadly that's more or less the only clearly defined use-case. Because of the lack of TCs, lack of shipped-with tripod collar, minimum focus distance and slightly slower max aperture the Sigma has some limits uses.
Good points. I was pleasantly surprised that the max aperture is only a bit slower, I expected a larger delta. Any opinions on if/when Sigma will produce a TC?
I see some cheap 3rd party tripod collars, what's the consensus compared to the 1st party one?
p.19 #20 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
Eruditass wrote:
Good points. I was pleasantly surprised that the max aperture is only a bit slower, I expected a larger delta. Any opinions on if/when Sigma will produce a TC?
I see some cheap 3rd party tripod collars, what's the consensus compared to the 1st party one?
No chance for TC for now, Sigma said their licensing agreement with Sony is only for lenses...
), e.g.
.
zz wrote: