I had, until yesterday, a great copy of the 150-600mm C, very sharp but a bit slow AF on my 5DIV, 5DSR etc, and was really pleased with it. On the R5, it leisurely focussed, and with the Sigma 1.4xTC, very, very slow. Conversely, the 100-400mm II is blazingly fast, and still very fast with a 2xTC. So, yesterday, it was reluctantly packed up and sent for sale. Maybe a new firmware upgrade from Sigma would fix it (it was on the latest firmware). Perhaps others have had different experiences.
cpe1991 wrote:
I had, until yesterday, a great copy of the 150-600mm C, very sharp but a bit slow AF on my 5DIV, 5DSR etc, and was really pleased with it. On the R5, it leisurely focussed, and with the Sigma 1.4xTC, very, very slow. Conversely, the 100-400mm II is blazingly fast, and still very fast with a 2xTC. So, yesterday, it was reluctantly packed up and sent for sale. Maybe a new firmware upgrade from Sigma would fix it (it was on the latest firmware). Perhaps others have had different experiences.
Agree with your thoughts regarding the C 150-600 on the 5DIV . In my case, I use canon 1.4 not the sig 1.4
Sounds like it did not perform as well on the R5. Luckily I also have a 100-400II so your report of it working much better than the C 150-600 is good to hear.
Ironically I can't get the C 150 -600 + 1.4 to AF on the Sony A7rIII. Maybe the TC or MC11 is the issue.
**edit** played with it for a bit and the canon TC seems to be the issue, remove the TC and it AF
I've been using the Sigma 150-600 contemporary on the R5, but not with any teleconverters. It loses a bit of IQ to the big white lenses, but given the cost, it's Ok.
I'm not 100% sure as to how well the IS is or is not working on the Sigma lens - it's kind of odd.
The 100-400 II is an excellent lens on the R5, with and without the teleconverter. The only downside is you lose some aperture.
EDIT: I'm still working through the differences, but leaning towards using the 100-400 more, and the sigma less despite the f/6.3 at 600 versus f/8 at 560.
Tom_W wrote:
I've been using the Sigma 150-600 contemporary on the R5, but not with any teleconverters. It loses a bit of IQ to the big white lenses, but given the cost, it's Ok.
I'm not 100% sure as to how well the IS is or is not working on the Sigma lens - it's kind of odd.
The 100-400 II is an excellent lens on the R5, with and without the teleconverter. The only downside is you lose some aperture.
EDIT: I'm still working through the differences, but leaning towards using the 100-400 more, and the sigma less despite the f/6.3 at 600 versus f/8 at 560. ...Show more →
Yes, you'll loose some aperture, and reach using the 100-400II with or without a TC plus the canon is a bit snappier to focus.
The nice thing about the 150-600 with 1.4 is your @ 840, where as with the 100-400 + 1.4 your at 560 ...
840
- 560
Your loosing 280mm with the 100-400 + 1.4
If you shooting each lens native then your giving up 200mm
You can never have to much reach, I think it boils down to what the end user's target range is on a normal basics.
For some 100-400 + 1.4 will do the job, and others the 150-600 + 1.4 . I lean towards the 150-600 +1.4
Have you tried a 1.4 on the R5 with the Sig 150-600, if so what were the results ?
IndyFab wrote:
Yes, you'll loose some aperture, and reach using the 100-400II with or without a TC plus the canon is a bit snappier to focus.
The nice thing about the 150-600 with 1.4 is your @ 840, where as with the 100-400 + 1.4 your at 560 ...
840
- 560
Your loosing 280mm with the 100-400 + 1.4
If you shooting each lens native then your giving up 200mm
You can never have to much reach, I think it boils down to what the end user's target range is on a normal basics.
For some 100-400 + 1.4 will do the job, and others the 150-600 + 1.4 . I lean towards the 150-600 +1.4
Have you tried a 1.4 on the R5 with the Sig 150-600, if so what were the results ?
...Show more →
I tried the 150-600mm C with the 1.4x Sigma TC on the R5 - see my post above. IQ OK but AF very slow whereas the the 2xTC on the 100-400mm II has similar IQ but fast AF.
cpe1991 wrote:
I tried the 150-600mm C with the 1.4x Sigma TC on the R5 - see my post above. IQ OK but AF very slow whereas the the 2xTC on the 100-400mm II has similar IQ but fast AF.
Good to know, was your 2X a sigma or canon, if canon was it II 0r III ? Thanks.
IndyFab wrote:
Good to know, was your 2X a sigma or canon, if canon was it II 0r III ? Thanks.
I used the 1.4x Sigma on the Siggy, and the 1.4xTCIII and 2xTCIII on the Canon. Looking back over my files, the 2xTC+100-400mm II on the R5 gave better images than the Sigma at 840mm, but they were similar on other bodies with liveview. What has surprised me is how fast the R5 focusses with the 100-400 at 800mm f/11. It's faster than a Nikon D850 or D500 with a 1.4xTC on a 500/5.6 PF.
I am sure you know what you are talking about and on the R is it is fine. Indeed, the Sigma with the 1.4xTC was excellent with my 5DIV with both the OVF and liveview. However, there was a significant difference with my R5 and the latest firmware on both body and lens. If my experience is typical, then the R5 is just different from its predecessors. It was disappointing for me not to be able to use the 150-600mm with ease on the R5 as it was one of my favourite lenses.
By time I bought my R6, I had sold the sigma. I also had the 100-400II, and decided the 1.4x III on it was just as good despite being 2/3 stop less light. Never had a chance to use that combo on the R6, but it has better AF than my R or M50, and wouldn't expect that combo to perform worse on these new cameras.
cpe1991 wrote:
I am sure you know what you are talking about and on the R is it is fine. Indeed, the Sigma with the 1.4xTC was excellent with my 5DIV with both the OVF and liveview. However, there was a significant difference with my R5 and the latest firmware on both body and lens. If my experience is typical, then the R5 is just different from its predecessors. It was disappointing for me not to be able to use the 150-600mm with ease on the R5 as it was one of my favourite lenses.
Like you I have been very pleased with the performance of the Sig C + 1.4 on the 5DIV, How unfortunate to hear it doesn't perform as welll on the R5 ..
On the Sig C + 1.4 on the 5DIV @840 your at f9, using the 100-400II + 2X @800 your at f11 thats two stops difference
However the 100-400II + 2X seems to be the best option at this time if you want use it with the R5.
IndyFab wrote:
Like you I have been very pleased with the performance of the Sig C + 1.4 on the 5DIV, How unfortunate to hear it doesn't perform as welll on the R5 ..
On the Sig C + 1.4 on the 5DIV @840 your at f9, using the 100-400II + 2X @800 your at f11 thats two stops difference
However the 100-400II + 2X seems to be the best option at this time if you want use it with the R5.
f/9 to f/11 is just over half a stop, so not so much in it.
