I have a trip to Europe planned for this fall which will primarily entail landscape photography. However, we will be doing some bird photography at Lac Du Der in France. I plan to take my SL3 and the lenses to go with it.
I currently own the Leica 100-400 but feel that there is too much overlap with the 90-280 to justify carrying it. So, I am considering the Sigma 500 f5.6. Does anyone have experience using it with the SL3? How about with the Sigma 1.4x tc?
Any recommendations on how to deal with the slow sensor readout when photographing birds in motion?
If it ends up being that the SL3 is simply not up to the job of photographing BIF, then I won't really bother with the long lens. I just don't want to carry a second system (Sony) which also requires another set of batteries, body, lens, tc, charger, etc.
Quick Update: I did a search on Flickr to look for images shot with the SL3 and the Sigma 500mm. In that search, I found this Masa Kiki's work: https://www.flickr.com/photos/56960982@N04/
He/she shoots with Leica L mount bodies (SL3-S and SL3) and uses the Sigma 500 with and w/o teleconverters, including the 2x. Of course, other lenses are used as well, not just the Sigma 500m. The images are beautiful and even in shots where there is motion, details are sharp and clean. Of course, this would take a lot of practice, but it is really terrific to see such beautiful and successful images shot with this combination.
I have not used the lenses you mention, however, I went to Lac du Der a number of years ago, to do some bird photography in the Fall season (migration of cranes). I used a 100-400 (on a Canon DSLR), but that was quite short (except for pictures of large groups). It was during the photo festival and I was able to use 500, 600 and 800mm lenses (Canon would let people try pretty much all the long lenses they brought... it was awesome). I would say that 500 + 1.4 TC was the minimum to start isolating some flying cranes.
Xavier Rival wrote:
I have not used the lenses you mention, however, I went to Lac du Der a number of years ago, to do some bird photography in the Fall season (migration of cranes). I used a 100-400 (on a Canon DSLR), but that was quite short (except for pictures of large groups). It was during the photo festival and I was able to use 500, 600 and 800mm lenses (Canon would let people try pretty much all the long lenses they brought... it was awesome). I would say that 500 + 1.4 TC was the minimum to start isolating some flying cranes....Show more →
Thank you so much for this information. It is super helpful. The friend that I will be with said that a long lens is needed, but she did not specify how long. Your info gives me much more specific focal lengths.
I already own the Leica 1.4x tc which, after my post yesterday, I found out could be used with the Sigma 500mm, and from what I read it is better than Sigma's 1.4x.
rscheffler wrote:
Maybe Gordon has some insights to share about the 500 on the SL system? @flash@
It sounds like the latest SL firmware has significantly improved aspects of AF performance. Again, something Gordon can probably touch on.
Good idea to get Gordon's feedback on the 500mm. If he does not see the post and respond, I will PM him and ask if he will as there are now at least two of us who are interested.
I have also read that the new firmware has improved the AF and I hope to update to it within the next few days.
The Sigma 500mm is really excellent, with or without a 1.4x. I don’t own a 2x in L mount and I had to get a second copy of the 1.4x as the first was a dud. But now it’s a premium combo. As long as you’re happy with a 5.6 prime you’re golden. It’s superb optically. AF speed is excellent. A little AI noise reduction goes a long way. You need to start at 1/2000 for birds and often shoot at 1/4000 or more. 500mm is on the short end for birds though. It’s basically the equivalent of the highly regarded PF lenses by Nikon and certainly Canon users wish they had something like it.
On the SL3 w’ f.w. 4 AF is actually very good. It’s close enough to my S1Rii that I basically can’t tell the difference. Certainly better than any Fuji I own. The S1Rii has EFCS and a slightly faster readout speed which are advantages. I also have the SL3’s nearest competitor, the Sony A7R5. I feel it’s slightly behind the Sony but not by much at all. The Sony has the AI chip and also can be set to *just* birds, which does speed things up in initial acquisition just a tiny bit. If the Sony were a 100 the SL3 is a 90-95. I don’t think AF speed is the limitation of either camera. The Sony has more Af detection subjects but for birds they both do well.
I don’t have the 500 in E mount but I do have a full set of GM super tell’s and the spectacular 300-600 Sigma and with the A7R5 I don’t get much higher success with these than the SL3 and the 500mm. AF speed isn’t the biggest limitation, for me.
Where these cameras don’t keep up is against the fast readout sensor cameras. The biggest drawback with birds in flight, for me is that the evf blacks out between shots, even in electronic shutter mode, which I absolutely do NOT recommend for birds with the SL3/A7R5/S1Rii. I have become very used to cameras like the A1ii and R5ii that are blackout free have very fast readout sensors, super fast drive modes and also have pre-capture. This makes BiF much much easier. These are the gold standard. To this end the A7R5 and SL3’s biggest limitations are that they don’t offer these functions so you’ll have to work a bit harder to keep the birds in the frame. Also your fps is more limited.
For the SL3 I’m having decent success with the following settings.
AFC
tracking
5fps
AF mode set to wildlife
subject set to Animal, eye body.
One annoyance besides the hardware limitations. The SL3 doesn’t revert to normal tracking if subject detection fails. It just goes to spot, even if tracking is set. This is a PITA and only Leica and Panasonic do this. I know several that have already sent suggestions to Leica.
Overall I think the SL3 is very good for general wildlife, stationary birds and good for casual BiF shooting. If I were REALLY into BiF it’s not the camera I’d choose because of the evf blackout. To make a meaningful improvement you need not better Af but a different sensor design. But overall the SL3 is now a well rounded package and you can add casual wildlife shooting to its capabilities.
My personal preferences would be to take a 60-600. I prefer the convenience of a zoom over a prime if I don’t have a specific subject and the 60-600 matches anything from the other brands in its class. The 500 is better if you’re doing any walking or hiking, which is what I keep it for.
The Sigma 500 gives up almost nothing except aperture to any super tele. The SL3 is now in the same ballpark as any other BSI sensor camera.
The Sigma 500mm is really excellent, with or without a 1.4x. I don’t own a 2x in L mount and I had to get a second copy of the 1.4x as the first was a dud. But now it’s a premium combo. As long as you’re happy with a 5.6 prime you’re golden. It’s superb optically. AF speed is excellent. A little AI noise reduction goes a long way. You need to start at 1/2000 for birds and often shoot at 1/4000 or more. 500mm is on the short end for birds though. It’s basically the equivalent of the highly regarded PF lenses by Nikon and certainly Canon users wish they had something like it.
On the SL3 w’ f.w. 4 AF is actually very good. It’s close enough to my S1Rii that I basically can’t tell the difference. Certainly better than any Fuji I own. The S1Rii has EFCS and a slightly faster readout speed which are advantages. I also have the SL3’s nearest competitor, the Sony A7R5. I feel it’s slightly behind the Sony but not by much at all. The Sony has the AI chip and also can be set to *just* birds, which does speed things up in initial acquisition just a tiny bit. If the Sony were a 100 the SL3 is a 90-95. I don’t think AF speed is the limitation of either camera. The Sony has more Af detection subjects but for birds they both do well.
I don’t have the 500 in E mount but I do have a full set of GM super tell’s and the spectacular 300-600 Sigma and with the A7R5 I don’t get much higher success with these than the SL3 and the 500mm. AF speed isn’t the biggest limitation, for me.
Where these cameras don’t keep up is against the fast readout sensor cameras. The biggest drawback with birds in flight, for me is that the evf blacks out between shots, even in electronic shutter mode, which I absolutely do NOT recommend for birds with the SL3/A7R5/S1Rii. I have become very used to cameras like the A1ii and R5ii that are blackout free have very fast readout sensors, super fast drive modes and also have pre-capture. This makes BiF much much easier. These are the gold standard. To this end the A7R5 and SL3’s biggest limitations are that they don’t offer these functions so you’ll have to work a bit harder to keep the birds in the frame. Also your fps is more limited.
For the SL3 I’m having decent success with the following settings.
AFC
tracking
5fps
AF mode set to wildlife
subject set to Animal, eye body.
One annoyance besides the hardware limitations. The SL3 doesn’t revert to normal tracking if subject detection fails. It just goes to spot, even if tracking is set. This is a PITA and only Leica and Panasonic do this. I know several that have already sent suggestions to Leica.
Overall I think the SL3 is very good for general wildlife, stationary birds and good for casual BiF shooting. If I were REALLY into BiF it’s not the camera I’d choose because of the evf blackout. To make a meaningful improvement you need not better Af but a different sensor design. But overall the SL3 is now a well rounded package and you can add casual wildlife shooting to its capabilities.
My personal preferences would be to take a 60-600. I prefer the convenience of a zoom over a prime if I don’t have a specific subject and the 60-600 matches anything from the other brands in its class. The 500 is better if you’re doing any walking or hiking, which is what I keep it for.
The Sigma 500 gives up almost nothing except aperture to any super tele. The SL3 is now in the same ballpark as any other BSI sensor camera.
Gordon - Thank you for all of the information and recommendations. You mentioned many things that need consideration in one way or another. I am glad to hear that the 500mm with or w/o the 1.4x tc is an excellent performer on the SL3 and that the combo is ok (while not excellent owing to the camera limitations) for birds.
If the upcoming trip were primarily for birds and/or wildlife, I would take my Sony kit (A1 bodies), but this will primarily be a landscape photography trip and I prefer the L-mount equipment for that. Based on your information, it seems like the 500mm is a good option. Hopefully, in the future, either Panasonic or Leica (or both) will improve the sensor readout problems, and with the Leica make the EVF blackout free.
I will take two bodies and the 90-280, which as you know is spectacular. Another reason why I am looking at the 500mm is the size and weight. As I will take two Leica zooms, and possible my Panasonic wide angle, the kit gets pretty heavy and the lenses are not small either. The 500mm would not add a huge amount of weight or bulk.
