p.6 #1 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
samosh wrote:
To me the biggest question is how fast the AF on Sigma going to be at long end. I have DSLR version with MC-11 and it was driving me nuts because it was noticeably slower than all my other lenses. I ended up buying Sony 100-400 and TC 1.4 and never looked back. I have no complaints about IQ on Sigma, just AF speed. If there is an improvement on mirrorless version, then it will be incredible bargain.
These videos should help answer that question:
Chris Frost:
Dustin Abbott:
Gordan Laing:
It appears the mirrorless version has made great strides in AF speed.
p.6 #2 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
samosh wrote:
To me the biggest question is how fast the AF on Sigma going to be at long end. I have DSLR version with MC-11 and it was driving me nuts because it was noticeably slower than all my other lenses. I ended up buying Sony 100-400 and TC 1.4 and never looked back. I have no complaints about IQ on Sigma, just AF speed. If there is an improvement on mirrorless version, then it will be incredible bargain.
According to Dustin Abbott's review, this 100-400 is significantly faster to AF than the DSLR version...even than the DSLR version used on Canon bodies.
p.6 #3 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
https://www.cameralabs.com/sigma-100-400mm-f5-6-3-dg-dn-os-review/3/
Gordon @ Cameralabs:
"I tried the Sigma 100-400mm on Brighton’s seagull population in flight and found it could certainly deliver some decent images coupled with the A7r III’s autofocus system. But as noted earlier, the continuous AF on my sample wasn’t quite as snappy or confident as Sony’s own 100-400 G Master lens, resulting in a lower hit rate with birds in flight – but again this could be a pre-production issue, so check back for updates."
Jman13 wrote:
According to Dustin Abbott's review, this 100-400 is significantly faster to AF than the DSLR version...even than the DSLR version used on Canon bodies.
Don't know what to tell you. I mean they had an hour-long presentation on the challenges they faced rebuilding this lens from the ground up in order to take advantage of mirrorless cameras so no, it doesn't look like they slapped an adapter to the end and called it a day.
When I compared images from B & H with the Nikon and Canon DSLR version it just appears that way to me. But then again it could be the pain meds I'm on!!
p.6 #5 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
I didn't say it was as good as the GM, just that it was a notable improvement on the DSLR version.
serhan_ wrote: https://www.cameralabs.com/sigma-100-400mm-f5-6-3-dg-dn-os-review/3/
Gordon @ Cameralabs:
"I tried the Sigma 100-400mm on Brighton’s seagull population in flight and found it could certainly deliver some decent images coupled with the A7r III’s autofocus system. But as noted earlier, the continuous AF on my sample wasn’t quite as snappy or confident as Sony’s own 100-400 G Master lens, resulting in a lower hit rate with birds in flight – but again this could be a pre-production issue, so check back for updates."
p.6 #10 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
Like the versatility of 100-400, also like the weight (2.55 lb/1160g) and $799 is certainly a competitive price! As someone who is always looking for good lenses for birding, I do find f5-6.3 is a bit insufficient. Maybe a birding lens for a very bright day
p.6 #11 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
buseyphoto wrote:
Like the versatility of 100-400, also like the weight (2.55 lb/1160g) and $799 is certainly a competitive price! As someone who is always looking for good lenses for birding, I do find f5-6.3 is a bit insufficient. Maybe a birding lens for a very bright day
Is it really insufficient? It's only 1/3rd of a stop slower than the GM. It's also faster or the same as the 200-600 and that's Sony's main BIF lens.
p.6 #12 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
Fred Miranda wrote:
Did any of the reviewers tested the Sony TCs on the new Sigma FE? I have a feeling it will not work but would love to be wrong.
None of the three did. However, Dustin Abbott stated that he was going to do so as soon as he received the TC from Sony, and said he would post if it works or not in the comments section of his review once done.
Seems like Sigma is skirting the question - they announced converters for the L-mount though.
p.6 #16 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
Going to preorder one and give it a try. I had the 100-400mm GM and now have the 200-600mm which I love. However a lighter package would be nice sometimes and not spending 2500.00 on another GM will be nice. Hopefully it works out well. Mostly will use it on my A9 but hoping it can handle the resolution of my A7RIV as well.
p.6 #17 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
derKoekje wrote:
Is it really insufficient? It's only 1/3rd of a stop slower than the GM. It's also faster or the same as the 200-600 and that's Sony's main BIF lens.
In terms of where the aperture reduces throughout the range, the Sigma 100-400mm only offers its maximum f5 between 100 and 113mm, closing to f5.6 between 113 and 235mm, after which it’s f6.3 between 235 and 400mm.
The Sony goes from F4.5 to F5 by 115mm, and reaches the smallest maximum aperture of F5.6 by a paltry 162mm. The Canon, by contrast, doesn’t hit F5.6 until 312mm!!
p.6 #18 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
So the sigma is 1/3 stop slower throughout the range, except between 162 and 235, where they are the same. 1/3 stop is pretty trivial, so worth the trade-off for me.
p.6 #19 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
Only had Canon 100-400L and I always considered that to be a f8 lens. I will do so for any f6.3 lenses too. To me having f5.6 doesn't give me anything that big over f8 lens in this focal length range for what these lenses get typically used. Some may use for sports but these are mainly as smaller range/weight/cost alternatives to superteles.
p.6 #20 · Pre-order: Sigma 100-400/5-6.3 DG DN OS FE ($949!)
bobby350z wrote:
Only had Canon 100-400L and I always considered that to be a f8 lens. I will do so for any f6.3 lenses too. To me having f5.6 doesn't give me anything that big over f8 lens in this focal length range for what these lenses get typically used. Some may use for sports but these are mainly as smaller range/weight/cost alternatives to superteles.
Possibly, but for landscape shooters the 100-400 range is pretty sweet. I don't see any landscapers lugging around a supertele, but I see quite a few carrying the 100-400.
I used to shoot sports ( rodeos, x-country skiing, Ironman ) using a Sigma 120-300 2.8 and it was perfect for those sports...so the 100-400 would fit in very nicely.
