tomba8tomba wrote:
The AF-performance of the adapted Sigma 150-600mm lens is very poor compared to the Canon lenses, regardless of whether they are native RF (100-400, 100-500, 200-800) or adapted EF lenses (100-400 II).
The Sigma 150-600 „works“ but I would NOT recommend it.
you might want to make sure you have the latest Sigma firmware for your lens installed. I believe they released an update back in 22-23 to fix focusing issues on all their legacy lenses on Canon Mirrorless.
dhlewis wrote:
you might want to make sure you have the latest Sigma firmware for your lens installed. I believe they released an update back in 22-23 to fix focusing issues on all their legacy lenses on Canon Mirrorless.
It „works“ with the latest Sigma firmware, yes.
But if you ever mount a native RF (100-400, 100-500, 200-800) or adapted EF lenses (100-400 II), you will say the Sigma’s AF performance is very poor.
I used a Sigma 150-600 contemporary once and found the AF was atrocious. I would not recommend it when compared to a 100-400 II or 100-500, the latter which I currently own and feel works well with the RF 1.4x.
My prefered Canon combo since years is R7 paired with EF 100-400 ii and 500 f4 with R5, often with 1.4x or 2x converters on the 500. I sometimes use R7 with the 2x converter on the 500 for maximum pixels per duck ratio. Two years ago, I also added a Nikon Z8 paired with the Nikon 500 5.6 PF for when I need a very light long reach combo. I like this combo a lot, paired with 1.7x iii converter, it is awesome in good light. This lens is worth buying a Z6 iii or a Z8 just to use it. The Z 800 6.3 PF is also worth having for someone looking to shave weight from a 500 or 600 f4 Canon combo. The Nikon 800 with 1.4x converter gives slightly more resolution than the Canon 500 f4 ii with 2x iii converter from my experience. The downside of this Nikon combo is that the closest focus distance is far enough to sometimes miss shots compared to the Canon combos.. So the Canon combos still sees a lot of use for me in dimmer light or in denser natural environment. The Nikon 800 is now my go to kayak lens. I got tired of waiting for Canon’s hight quality lighter telephotos. As you can tell now, I am not a brand fan boy. I want to use the tools that get the job done properly for me.
EB-1 wrote:
Those old 150-600s are so due for MILS design updates, but Canon will probably not allow them since they want to sell that meh 200-800.
EBH
May be meh to you, but it is gold to me. That rumored X00-600/whatever is meh to me. I mean only 600?? Meh!!
800+mm is very addictive, especially in that handy package that includes 200-799. And I did not have to sell my last kidney to get one. Now, a 800/8 L with "Macro" would be one that might be close.
The ridiculously long MFD of the big white primes, No Way. And that´s before adding the bulk and price to the cons.
When I had the R7 I found the 100-500 to be a perfect match, corresponding to 160-800mm field of view. The 600/11 at 960mm would be very popular at an unreal package size if it was not for the 800/11. The 800 is _far_ bulkier, but, you know... bigger is better. And at 1280mm it has reach. If the air is clean. Which it rarely is if the distances gets longer. Which they do with 1280mm reach.
