lifeandmylens wrote:
The pictures above look fantastic. What telephoto will you use on the L mount until something better comes along? The 90-280?
Thanks - but I think the reason they look okay is that they have been downsized quite a bit for posting here. If you look at the original files at 100%, the detail is just not there. I'm used to seeing a lot more definition in feathers, even with m4/3 or APS-C gear.
If I was sticking with the L-mount for birds and wildlife, I would pick up a used Canon EF telephoto and an adapter. There are some really good long lens options from Nikon as well, but no adapters that provide AF, unfortunately.
molson wrote:
I ended up returning my L-mount Sigma 150-600 DG DN. While it wasn't a really bad lens, it was optically the poorest performing lens I own, so I really couldn't justify keeping it. It's unfortunate there isn't anything better out there for L-mount that doesn't require an adapter.
Thanks for your candid appraisal on the new 150-600mm. I have seen some posts on the internet where people really liked it, but the image details (feathers, fur) were muddled, just as you experienced. I had been considering this lens but am not terribly impressed from what I have seen overall. Maybe it is a good lens for the price point and flexibility, but the performance does not appear to be stellar.
Abuttolph wrote:
Thanks for your candid appraisal on the new 150-600mm. I have seen some posts on the internet where people really liked it, but the image details (feathers, fur) were muddled, just as you experienced. I had been considering this lens but am not terribly impressed from what I have seen overall. Maybe it is a good lens for the price point and flexibility, but the performance does not appear to be stellar.
I think that if all you ever do with your photos is post them as small JPEGs on Instagram or the like, you might be happy with the lens - but you can get better performance for less money and a lot less weight with a micro Four Thirds camera and 100-400mm zoom.
After reading that article, I decided to get another copy of the lens myself. It should be here in a few days, and I will be testing specifically for that vertical-orientation issue.
molson wrote:
After reading that article, I decided to get another copy of the lens myself. It should be here in a few days, and I will be testing specifically for that vertical-orientation issue.
To answer my own question. My L mount copy arrived and one of the first things I checked was corner sharpness between landscape and portrait orientation. I could not see a difference between any of the 4 possible orientations.
No observable difference in sharpness when shooting in vertical orientation - either this copy is not affected, or it's only a problem with the Sony version...?
RustyBug wrote:
What are your thoughts on sample variation? Same IQ (i.e. detail, etc.), or better in the second copy?
I'm beginning to think that focus accuracy with the S1/S1R bodies is the probably the biggest determinant in image quality.
The rendering of the lens is different than the other telephotos I've been using, but I think that is a matter of taste - like most Sigma lenses I've tried, fine details look "smoother" which can render nicer backgrounds, but without the micro-contrast that pixel peepers (me...) like to see in things like feathers or fur. It's not unsharp, just a different flavour of sharpness.
molson wrote:
I'm beginning to think that focus accuracy with the S1/S1R bodies is the probably the biggest determinant in image quality.
The rendering of the lens is different than the other telephotos I've been using, but I think that is a matter of taste - like most Sigma lenses I've tried, fine details look "smoother" which can render nicer backgrounds, but without the micro-contrast that pixel peepers (me...) like to see in things like feathers or fur. It's not unsharp, just a different flavour of sharpness.
Did you keep your second copy ?
I bought the 150-600mm DG DN for my Lumix S cameras and I totally agree with you. There is fine details but they are a bit soft/smooth. I bought this lens because some people told me the lens was far more sharp than the Panasonic 100-400mm, this is not my experience wide open. Too bad because the lens has nice contrast (deep blacks) like most DG DN lenses. Closing down to f7.1/f8 brings better results though.
