Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

Super Zoom Dilemma (re-post from Leica & Alternative Gear Section)

GMSchneider
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Super Zoom Dilemma (re-post from Leica & Alternative Gear Section)

I need some help making a decision on a super zoom in particular a Sigma 150-600 Sport or the 60-600.

I shoot sports for a couple high schools in my area and I'm having some reach issues for field sports. I currently shoot with a Canon 1Dx (primarily) and an R6 with a 100-400ii. I'm finding 400mm just isn't long enough since most of the action takes place around midfield and I like sitting on the base/goal line. I have added a Canon 1.4ii teleconverter and while I find the reach to be great, image quality and AF consistency is a bit lacking as well as having to shoot a F8 can be too dark.

So, I have been looking at either of those two Sigma lens (the Tamron is out because of the opposite zooming). I've been doing research on both of those and have found a mixed bag of reviews. I have seen reviews where they say the image quality of the Sigmas is equivalent to the 100-400ii with a teleconverter at 600mm. I have also seen reviews where people rave about those lenses. So now I really don't know what to do.

Would anyone be able to give me their two cents?

Oct 09, 2023 at 02:22 PM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Super Zoom Dilemma (re-post from Leica & Alternative Gear Section)

Are the games played on artificial turf during the day, in sunny or warm overcast conditions? If so, you could be seeing image degradation caused by heat radiating off the field. The farther away the action, the more it will affect images. While I prefer sitting to drop the horizon lower in the image and get more distant background rather than turf in the composition, standing can sometimes reduce this problem.

That said, I'd probably lean towards using the R6 as the primary camera. I was a Canon 1D series user since its inception, including the 1DX and 1DXII. Last fall I tried mirrorless (R3, 5, 6 and 7) to see what worked and what didn't. I ended up with an R6II as my primary and an R6 as secondary. I have found AF with both cameras to be more consistent than the 1DXII.

In your reach limited scenario, you might wish to try the R7. APS-C crop will give you 640mm equivalent and 32MP for additional cropping you're not able to do with your two 20MP cameras. Only downside of the R7 is no vertical grip option and e-shutter results in too much rolling shutter for sports action. But IIRC it will do 15fps in EFCS. It has similar AF modes and features found in the R3 and R6II, with some additional capabilities over the R6. IOW, I'd consider this paired with the Canon 100-400 rather than either of the 600mm zooms you suggested. Down the road, if funds allow, you could consider the RF 100-500. It is a bit slow at the long end but after using one on CPS trial, I feel it's similar in sharpness to my 200-400. From various reviews I've read, it seems to be one of the better xxx-500/600 zooms on the market, for sharpness.

Oct 09, 2023 at 05:54 PM

Uarctos
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Super Zoom Dilemma (re-post from Leica & Alternative Gear Section)

Difficult choice. You have two low Mpx bodies with limited crop-ability and a (relatively) short and slow lens. Usually those zooms tend to be softer at the long end, so you may need to stop them down anyway. If I were you I will take into consideration older EF primes, such as the 500mm f4 IS, still a stellar lens which will render images far more pleasing than any of the zooms mentioned above (but is big and heavy) or a high Mpx body with a full frame sensor, such as the R5.

Oct 10, 2023 at 12:14 AM

Ferrophot
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Super Zoom Dilemma (re-post from Leica & Alternative Gear Section)

I have an R6 and 100-400L ii and a Sigma 150-600 C. I have used all these for junior sports. With the R6 and both these lenses the AF is accurate and the IQ, sharpness good. The AF speed is in another class with the 100-400Lii, the Sigma C, I believe is too slow with initial acquisition for sports, but once it locks on it follows ok.
If it is sports I think I would try the R7 rather than the Sigmas which are big and heavy and I think 150mm at the short end is too long when the game gets close.
On the other hand for wildlife the additional reach of the Sigmas is more important than the slightly better sharpness of the 100-400Lii.
While on paper the R7 AF is the same as the later FF mirrorless some photographers have found it not as consistent as the R6 so I think trying it out before spending the money would be wise.

Oct 10, 2023 at 06:10 AM

RexGig0
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Super Zoom Dilemma (re-post from Leica & Alternative Gear Section)

Short answer: Try the newest Extender, the 1.4X III, before giving up on your EF 100-400L II IS. Rent, borrow, or, buy a used one, that can be sold, later, if it’s not your cup of tea. (This last method can be cheaper than rental.) I have the III, and though I never used the first two versions, I understand that the III represented a substantial improvement. If using a current-generation EF lens, it has been known that using the current-generation Extender EF 1.4x III is a best practice.

Longer answer:

The Sigma 150-600mm Sport, made for the EF and F mounts, is a noticeably heavy lens. Its weight can quickly become oppressive when the forward end telescopes outward, when zooming. A monopod helps with overall weight, but the balance point shifting outward will affect the ease of monopod usage. I would recommend against getting the EF-mount 150-600mm Sport sight unseen. One’s ability to handle the weight and forward-biased balance probably has to be experienced, in person. (If there is a more recent, RF-mount version available, I am unfamiliar with it.

I do not remember our 150-600 Sport being weak at the 600mm end, but, that could be because I have hated zooming the thing to 600mm, due to the balance shifting forward, so much

I want to convince my wife that we should part with our Sigma 150-600mm Sport. She likes it, but, I am the one who has to lug the thing around, along with the requisite substantial tripod. We now have lighter-weight ways to reach farther, so, the 150-600mm Sport is redundant. (Ours is Nikon F-mount; my wife is a dedicated Nikon shooter, and I normally use Nikon for birds and distant wildlife. Canon remains my closer-range and macro system.)

The Sigma 60-600mm Sport is, reportedly, much user-friendlier to handle, but I cannot say, one way, or the other. 60mm is certainly seems that it would be much handier, at closer, range than 150mm.

I have, and really do like the EF 100-400mm L II IS. When I have used an Extender 1.4x III, the weakness has been at shorter range. I have not wanted to adjust anything, because it is so very good at longer range. Notably, the camera that I normally use with this lens is a 5Ds R, and this combo is the chief exception to Canon being my “closer-range and macro system.”)

Oct 10, 2023 at 11:36 AM

GMSchneider
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Super Zoom Dilemma (re-post from Leica & Alternative Gear Section)

Thanks for the responses everyone!

A big prime lens isn't in my budget, nor is a 200-400 f4, which is the lens I would purchase if money was no object...thus the reason I was considering the Sigmas. I have heard the Sigmas get very front heavy when zoomed out to 600mm, but what's more important to me is AF speed (which my 100-400ii has). It doesn't sound like either of the Sigmas are very snappy autofocusing.

I also own a 7dII which is a bit soft on my 100-400ii even stopped down a little. I was considering an R7 but not having the vertical grip is a big no-go for me. I haven't done any research on an R7 because of that, but I'll take a look into that.

I was also considering the Mark III 1.4x because some people have seen only slight image degradation using it. For a couple hundred bucks, I could buy one and then sell it if I wasn't happy.

Here's a link to a Flickr album from a recent game using a 1.4xii on my 100-400. For some reason I keep getting a warning when I try to embed a link. While that combo works, you can clearly see some loss of image sharpness compared to the bare lens. If the Mark III is slightly better, I could live with that.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/10899151@N03/albums/72177720311828715

Oct 10, 2023 at 12:28 PM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Super Zoom Dilemma (re-post from Leica & Alternative Gear Section)

The images lack a bit of bite, but might just be what you get with that lens and TC combo. I have not used either, so am just speculating. Maybe worth trying the 1.4 v3 but I'd also try the R6 in place of the 1DX just to see if there is any noticeable difference in sharpness or focus accuracy. A bit difficult to really dive into the details given that the images are restricted to ~2000 pixels as the largest option. OK, just noticed the goalie shot is with the R6, which is probably as good as it's going to get.

While it looks like the games were on natural turf, in some images you can see the effects of heat waves in the background bokeh. It could still be a factor by taking some fine detail edge off images.

Has whoever receives these images said anything? IMO they're definitely usable and more sharpening in post might help. I'd probably also prioritize near field action. IMO it will just look better than shooting all the way across the field. But of course, if it's a game defining moment, you'd still want it.

I agree it's unfortunate about the R7 not taking a vertical grip, but do you shoot a high percentage of verticals? You could probably crop verticals out of it without significant resolution loss compared to the 1DX/R6. R7 is 6960x4640 while R6 is 5472x3648. The other option is a 90D, but I tried it for sports and thought it was too sluggish. I also thought it's regular AF was too inconsistent. It was much better in pseudo-mirrorless (live view) mode, but it's a hassle to shoot sports with long lenses in bright light from the back screen rather than the viewfinder.

Oct 10, 2023 at 01:27 PM

GMSchneider
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Super Zoom Dilemma (re-post from Leica & Alternative Gear Section)

I think I'm going to get a 1.4xiii and try that out. And I think I'll try renting a Sigma 60-600 because it's under a $100 for a 5 day rental. That will give me definitive results.

And I haven't received any negative feedback from the schools, but I can see the lack of sharpness in the images and I know I shouldn't worry about it. But I'm trying to put out the best images that I can.

Oct 11, 2023 at 12:40 PM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Super Zoom Dilemma (re-post from Leica & Alternative Gear Section)

Let us know how it goes - I'm curious about any differences you see with the 1.4 vIII.

I'm sure what you're providing them now is better than anything else they might receive. From a technical standpoint, any noteworthy improvement likely means super-tele territory. The 100-500 is probably also a step up, but has its own set of tradeoffs. Actually, it's slightly less to rent than the 60-600.

Oct 11, 2023 at 01:53 PM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Super Zoom Dilemma (re-post from Leica & Alternative Gear Section)

Oct 12, 2023 at 10:47 AM

IndyFab
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Super Zoom Dilemma (re-post from Leica & Alternative Gear Section)

I use both the 100-400II + 1.4III & Sig C 150-600 + 1.4III on a R5 / No complaints.

Cant speak to the Sig S 60-600 If your going to use the S, plan on using either a mono/tri/pod. Heavier than the C

When I bought my C, I was talked out of buying the S by the Sigma rep. If you will find yourself shooting in inclement weather, the S may be a better choice for you.

Your welcome to look at my Flickr page, and see what you think.

Oct 12, 2023 at 12:13 PM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Super Zoom Dilemma (re-post from Leica & Alternative Gear Section)

GMSchneider wrote:
I need some help making a decision on a super zoom in particular a Sigma 150-600 Sport or the 60-600.

I shoot sports for a couple high schools in my area and I'm having some reach issues for field sports. I currently shoot with a Canon 1Dx (primarily) and an R6 with a 100-400ii. I'm finding 400mm just isn't long enough since most of the action takes place around midfield and I like sitting on the base/goal line. I have added a Canon 1.4ii teleconverter and while I find the reach to be great, image quality and AF consistency is a...Show more →
AmbientMike wrote:
Are there issues with shooting at midfield? Moving there sounds like the easiest solution.

If the intent is to get players of a specific team on the attack, you get them coming at you from behind the goal line. At midfield you will be to the side of the direction of play and as they move past you, you’ll see more of the defenders at that side of the field. It really depends on preferences and what you want to cover. While it’s ‘only’ high school, and you probably have pretty good access, at higher levels, photographers are often restricted to the goal line.

Oct 12, 2023 at 12:41 PM


FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.