Re: Sigma 150-600C versus Canon 100-400 II with 1.4x TC
jcolwell wrote:
It\'s totally valid to compare the EX 150-600 OS C and EF 100-400L IS II + 1.4X at f/8, but that begs the question... Why would you carry a heavier lens?
The EF 100-400L is considerably smaller and lighter than the EX 150-600 C. In some circumstances, I\'ll happily lug around \'extra weight\', if that gives me \'extra capability\'. IOW, if the EX 150-600 C isn\'t better at f/5.6 than the EF 100-400 + 1.4x at f/8, then why would I take the extra effort to carry the EX around? I\'d take the effort if I got equivalent IQ at a faster stop, but not for equivalent IQ at the same stop (from a much larger and heavier lens).
I\'ve mostly been reading others\' posts, but wanted to add my two cents\' worth in regards to the weight of the lenses in question, as I own both the Canon 100-400L II and the Sigma 150-600 C, as well as the 1.4X III.
I just pulled out both lenses and weighed them on a digital scale, the Sigma bare versus the Canon with the 1.4X TC III attached. The Canon has the replacement Kirk foot. Both lenses have Lens Coats on them. (For the Sigma, I repurposed the Lens Coat from the Tamron 150-600, which actually works pretty well with the Sigma.) Here are the relative weights:
Sigma: 2255 grams
Canon + 1.4 TC: 2051 grams
So, the Sigma weighs 204 grams more, or 0.72 ounces more, or less than a half pound more than the Canon plus 1.4X TC. Just to put in perspective that the Sigma is heavier, but not significantly heavier.
Re: Sigma 150-600C versus Canon 100-400 II with 1.4x TC
jcolwell wrote:
It\'s totally valid to compare the EX 150-600 OS C and EF 100-400L IS II + 1.4X at f/8, but that begs the question... Why would you carry a heavier lens?
The EF 100-400L is considerably smaller and lighter than the EX 150-600 C. In some circumstances, I\'ll happily lug around \'extra weight\', if that gives me \'extra capability\'. IOW, if the EX 150-600 C isn\'t better at f/5.6 than the EF 100-400 + 1.4x at f/8, then why would I take the extra effort to carry the EX around? I\'d take the effort if I got equivalent IQ at a faster stop, but not for equivalent IQ at the same stop (from a much larger and heavier lens).
I\'ve mostly been reading others\' posts, but wanted to add my two cents\' worth in regards to the weight of the lenses in question, as I own both the Canon 100-400L II and the Sigma 150-600 C, as well as the 1.4X III.
I just pulled out both lenses and weighed them on a digital scale, the Sigma bare versus the Canon with the 1.4X TC III attached. Both lenses have Lens Coats on them. (For the Sigma, I repurposed the Lens Coat from the Tamron 150-600, which actually works pretty well with the Sigma.) Here are the relative weights:
Sigma: 2255 grams
Canon + 1.4 TC: 2051 grams
So, the Sigma weighs 204 grams more, or 0.72 ounces more, or less than a half pound more than the Canon plus 1.4X TC. Just to put in perspective that the Sigma is heavier, but not significantly heavier.
May 12, 2015 at 09:04 PM
Previous versions of gavin_emmons's message #13011736 « Sigma 150-600C versus Canon 100-400 II with 1.4x TC »
