bobek13 wrote:
I just got an rIVa and got a chance to play a bit with the Tammy yesterday - for now all I can say the rIV is a huge upgrade to my old R2. But I am a complete newbie in birding so that doesn`t say much.
One thing I did notice was that the focus struggled when forest was in the background and the birds small in the frame (I have sensitivity set to 5 (responsive) - maybe that also played a role in AF performance - although I did try a bit with 1 (sticky) but it felt worse). Other than that it seems fast and accurate.
Thanks for sharing. That's great to hear. I'm not much of a birder. I tend to hunt for mammals small and large (mostly foxes, coyotes, elk, and deer, but black bears and mountain lions when I get really lucky). Hopefully it will work out as well with the non-feathered targets. I'm in for the same learning curve on the rIV AF.
freaklikeme wrote:
As someone who didn't fall in love with the Sony 200-600 (while it's optically great, I don't need the ultimate FPS or best AF, and the packed and filter sizes made it a no-go for me), it's nice to see more options from the third-parties. The Sigma looks great, I like the MFD on the wide end, and I like that they shaved a couple of inches off the packed length with the external zoom.
Specs-wise, though, the Tamron 150-500 is looking really good to me. Nearly two inches shorter packed than the Sigma, greater than 1:4 reproduction ratio throughout the zoom range, lighter (though not by much), and I can live with the slight reduction in max aperture and only getting to 750ish with an APS-C crop. If it plays well with the rIV, it may be my Goldilocks tele-zoom. The fact that it's the least expensive option will be a huge bonus. I do wish it was designed to work with their Lens Utility, since being able to adjust the MF action would be great, but if AF works well, that probably won't be much of a concern....Show more →
Tammy sounds like an option for Sony ... but, not for L mount. Siggy has the edge over Tammy and Sony, in that department.
Kinda looks like Siggy stands alone in the L mount at 600mm (without TC).
molson wrote:
I'm curious to see how well the lens works with teleconverters.
That's the trouble. The only teleconverters on the E-mount are Sony teleconverters, and they don't operate with anything other than particular Sony lenses. So unless something changes, it won't work with TCs at all (unless the TCs can be used in manual focus mode only... or something).
On the L mount I assume there are teleconverter options, I don't pay much attention to that market.
GHarris wrote:
That's the trouble. The only teleconverters on the E-mount are Sony teleconverters, and they don't operate with anything other than particular Sony lenses. So unless something changes, it won't work with TCs at all (unless the TCs can be used in manual focus mode only... or something).
On the L mount I assume there are teleconverter options, I don't pay much attention to that market.
I was referring to the L-mont version, since this is on the Leica and Alternative Gear forum...
molson wrote:
I was referring to the L-mont version, since this is on the Leica and Alternative Gear forum...
Ah. Some threads appear in multiple forums. I got to it through the Sony forum. As I view the page even now it says "Sony forum" at the top. Funny quirk of how some threads function. I'm sorry for the confusion.
GHarris wrote:
Ah. Some threads appear in multiple forums. I got to it through the Sony forum. As I view the page even now it says "Sony forum" at the top. Funny quirk of how some threads function. I'm sorry for the confusion.
I don't know why Fred feels compelled to do that. The bulk of the threads in the Leica and Alt forum have nothing to do with Leica or Alt gear.
molson wrote:
I don't know why Fred feels compelled to do that. The bulk of the threads in the Leica and Alt forum have nothing to do with Leica or Alt gear.
Probably because it's a third-party lens available for both L and E mounts.
freaklikeme wrote:
True, at least until Panasonic catches up on lenses.
I don't see them going past 400mm native ... + TC's.
I was a bit disappointed to see their 70-300 doesn't play with TC's.
Presently, Panny's long game is 70-200 + 2X
There's the Sigma 100-400, I think the "Alliance" is careful to not step on each other's toes ... not too much, anyway. So, if Siggy is in the SuperTele range, I figure Panny will stay out of that space.
DSLR version, with 105mm filter:
Sigma 150-600mm OS Sports Lens 101.0 oz (2860g) 4.8 x 11.4" (121.9 x 289.6mm) 105mm
DG DN version, with 95mm filter:
Sigma 150-600mm DG DN OS Sports Lens 74.1 oz (2100g) 4.3 x 10.4" (109 x 264mm) 95mm
(I think I transcribed those right).
For Comparison to my current long glass:
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens 56.1 oz (1590g) 3.7 x 7.6" (94 x 193mm) 77mm
+TC of course adds something to the equation. The MFD on the new Sigma is even closer than the Canon ... which for a longer lens is a bit of a pleasant surprise (if the IQ is ok there).
RustyBug wrote:
I don't see them going past 400mm native ... + TC's.
I was a bit disappointed to see their 70-300 doesn't play with TC's.
Presently, Panny's long game is 70-200 + 2X
There's the Sigma 100-400, I think the "Alliance" is careful to not step on each other's toes ... not too much, anyway. So, if Siggy is in the SuperTele range, I figure Panny will stay out of that space.
DSLR version, with 105mm filter:
Sigma 150-600mm OS Sports Lens 101.0 oz (2860g) 4.8 x 11.4" (121.9 x 289.6mm) 105mm
DG DN version, with 95mm filter:
Sigma 150-600mm DG DN OS Sports Lens 74.1 oz (2100g) 4.3 x 10.4" (109 x 264mm) 95mm
I thought they had a super-tele on their roadmap, but maybe I'm getting that confused with the 70-300. I think it must be difficult to design a 70-300 to work with extenders. Even Canon's L lens won't allow it. Still, I'd be surprised if the 70-200/2.8 is the only lens they have planned for those extenders. Maybe they'll at least do a 300/2.8 or 4.
Of course, there's always Leica. Maybe we'll see a 600 from them for, you know, 20-30k.
It seems that most of the reviews have been for the Sony mount. I found one today that reviews the lens on the Sigma FPL and Leica SL2. It seems that while the lens does seem to be quite good, the biggest limitation is that it is slow. I am looking forward to seeing more reviews where the subject is further away. Anyway, it is certainly on my watch list.
Abuttolph wrote:
It seems that most of the reviews have been for the Sony mount. I found one today that reviews the lens on the Sigma FPL and Leica SL2. It seems that while the lens does seem to be quite good, the biggest limitation is that it is slow.
Dustin Abbott's review is up and as I feared the stepping motor is a big let down. Unforgivable for a sports lens IMO, would have been disappointing for a contemporary version. Tamron or Sony all the way IMO.
Jeffrey Myers wrote:
Do we feel that this will be a better option than the Tamron 150-600 G2?
Most definitely. I would instead choose the Tamron 150-500 since it was designed for mirrorless and AF is fast on Sony. Those DSLR lenses are no where as good adapted to mirrorless.
