About a year ago, I upgraded from the 5D3 to the Canon R5. Since the upgrade I just cant seem to get sharp photos with my Sigma 150-600. Anyone experience the same? I can throw on my Canon 400 F2.8 L IS lens and get great photos.
If I can't get it figured out, I think I am going to trade it for the Canon 800 F11. I can use the 400 F2.8 in low light and then have the 800 when conditions allow.
Mine focused ok, but wasn't that great for tracking action. I did sell mine and replaced it with the RF 100-400mm for everyday longer lens use, as well as an 800/11 for times I need real reach, and both AF notably better (and both are sharper too).
Do you have the Sigma Dock? Has it been updated to the latest firmware? Did you make any focus adjustments using the USB Dock? Perhaps remove them. Is it set to a custom mode? It also worked very well with both the TC-1401 and the TC-2001, though the latter did slow down focus quite a bit.
I made the same transition, i.e., 5D3 to R5. The Sigma 150-600C worked much, much better on the R5. There seems to be something going on with yours.
Jman13 wrote:
Mine focused ok, but wasn't that great for tracking action. I did sell mine and replaced it with the RF 100-400mm for everyday longer lens use, as well as an 800/11 for times I need real reach, and both AF notably better (and both are sharper too).
Thanks for the info. I didn't mention it, but my issues are also related to action, mostly birds. I have wondered if my problem is not shooting against a clean background (Trees) and just getting a bad focus point..
---------------------------------------------
PinholeR5 wrote:
Do you have the Sigma Dock? Has it been updated to the latest firmware? Did you make any focus adjustments using the USB Dock? Perhaps remove them. Is it set to a custom mode? It also worked very well with both the TC-1401 and the TC-2001, though the latter did slow down focus quite a bit.
I made the same transition, i.e., 5D3 to R5. The Sigma 150-600C worked much, much better on the R5. There seems to be something going on with yours.
Mine is the DG. Yes, I have the dock and recently checked the firmware again. I have used it with and without the custom modes and noticed no difference.
In hopes of getting more reach than my 100-400 USM II, I bought the Sigma 150-600 about 2 months ago. I thought the price was too good to be true and I was right. Af was slow and sharpness was very disappointing on my R5. I tried everything and unfortunately, I sent it back. I'll just wait a little longer until I can justify a used 500 or 600 prime.
RKnecht wrote:
In hopes of getting more reach than my 100-400 USM II, I bought the Sigma 150-600 about 2 months ago. I thought the price was too good to be true and I was right. Af was slow and sharpness was very disappointing on my R5. I tried everything and unfortunately, I sent it back. I'll just wait a little longer until I can justify a used 500 or 600 prime.
I started with the Sigma 150-600C and thought it was a good lens. In terms of value, I think it is outstanding. I got plenty of sharp images with it, though it takes more effort than with the 100-400mm II. That lens is just at a higher level in terms of IQ. So, I can see how going from the 100-400mm II to the Sigma 150-600C can be disappointing. You can get good results with just a bit more work in post, but the keeper rate is lower than the 100-400mm II for sure.
The same with AF. I thought the AF on the Sigma was good. Then when I got the 100-400mm II, I thought it was ultra-fast. I kept the 150-600mm around because it did give me a competent 840mm f/9 for that extra bit of reach, but would only use it sparingly and in portrait situations. Later, when I went to sell the 150-600mm (together with the 100-400mm II) to get the RF 100-500mm, I took the 150-600mm out for the last spin and it did feel slower and a bit softer since I had gotten used to the 100-400mm II. So I guess it is all a matter of perspective
Still, I think it is a great value lens and you can get good quality images with it. I did run these through Topaz DeNoise, so they got a little boost. The Cormorant was with the bare lens and the Great-Tailed Grackle shots were with the Sigma 1.4x TC (TC-1401).
I have used my R6 and 150-600 C with good results for stationary and slow moving birds. I have noted that the AF is sloooow and needs help by prefocussing but when locked on to birds passing in front produces sharp images. I haven't tried birds flying head-on but I think the AF slowness might make this a struggle. My Canon 100-400L AF is much faster.
I forgot to note that I bought the Sport version which I believe is the same optically, but has better weather sealing. I know the 100-500 is a great lens, but before I drop almost 3K on a F 7.1 zoom, I'll buy a used 500 or 600 prime and keep my 100-400.
Jman13 wrote:
Mine focused ok, but wasn't that great for tracking action.
I recently had this R5 focusing discussion with a friend who is a pro photographer/videographer, with television production experience, and long time Canon user. He claimed his pictures using the Canon 100-400 f4.5-5.6L IS II were on the soft side. I told him of my similar judgement when using the Sigma 150-600. The comparisons we had were based off our history using our respective Canon 1DX II's, with the same lenses.
Our experience was that the "hit rate" with the 1DX's were higher and the results sharper. The subjects were surfers and kiteboarders, so conditions were similar, although he and I did not shooting the same day. He shot handheld and I was on a tripod mounted gimbal.
This was my situation with the R5 and Sigma.
It was a bright, cloudless, but windy day at the beach. I turned off Optical Stabilization on the Sigma lens, before mounting it on the gimbal, relying on IBIS in the camera to compensate for vibrations. I shot Manual, exif shown below in pictures, ISO "auto" (generally ISO hovered in the low 100's), mechanical shutter. AF, "case 1", was "people" tracking. The subjects ranged from about 150 ft at shoreline, but over 300 ft away if they were doing any tricks. All were wearing wet suits, so little contrast and small facial area if hoods were being worn. I mention this as to a possible reason tracking could be erratic.
Looking through the viewfinder, I concentrated on keeping the center focus point on the head, which can be challenging, even when panning with the gimbal, but for the most part the camera was focusing successfully even at great distances. Kudos for the R5's focusing capability. The interesting, and somewhat head-scratching observation was that when the kiteboarder came close to shore, the focusing point would suddently shift off the subject, and multiple points would appear on the foamy areas of the water. This also occured sometimes switching from the subject to the bright white wave crest.
When I pulled the file up on DPP it showed the active focus points partially on the subject, but mostly on the seafoam.
Could the bright movement of the water fool the camera's tracking system?
I'm including two shots to illustrate. First is sharp. The second shows soft subject. I is also the one that focus points switched to water below her board_ and maybe without a face showing the focus point couldn't track.
I notice on another site that there are problems with both the Sigma and Tamron 150-600 lenses when AF is used with eye focus. Sigma state that this lens is incompatible with eye AF. The problem seems to be that the lens pulses back and forth around the true focus position. I had not noticed this with mine on an R6. Anybody see this effect?
Duade has mentioned this for his R5 and the new R7. He said the AF pulses. He did video reviews of this with both his cameras. He said Sigma has said that lens is not compatible with the R7 when using AI servo eye tracking...
