I think that we should thank both Sigma and Tamron for moving into the quality end of the lens market and giving Canon and Nikon something to think about. I already had the Sigma 150 to 600 Contemporary and it is a great lens but it is not one for carrying round with but great for bird hides or on a monopod. I got my 100 to 400 three weeks ago and so far it has been brilliant, I use it on a Nikon D500 and most of my photos are birds many of them in flight. No problems with the autofocus it has not let me down so far and I don't feel that I need a collar because unlike the 150 to 600 it is very comfortable to use hand held on the D500. Great review keep them coming.
Do you have any feel if one or the other is sharper, the 100-400 or the 150-600? I'm interested in a long zoom, but I'll probably only get one. I'm guessing the shorter lens is better until you need a teleconverter...? Thanks.
Own this lens. Picked it up in fantastic used condition. Please note, since these reviews came out, Sigma has updated the firmware several times. Including an algorithm update to the stability system. It is night and day better than it was at release. I sold off my Sigma 150-600 since this 100-400 does all I need to do and its significantly smaller and lighter.
wow , i'm really impressed , this is really great for everyone , great image quality + less weight + small body + great value + great focal lenght , what can you hate about this ?? thank you Dustin for your good review
@5:18 - It looks like the Canon missed focus on the barn/house itself vs. the Sigma. Paused at that frame, the tree branch is clearly sharper on the Canon, a bit out of focus on the Sigma, so the Canon appears to be front focused ever so slightly. It looks to have the same problem @3:03 and @6:27 (wide open and stopped down, respectively). Not that this really appears to change the comparison much, but I'd bet if they were both focused correctly at 100mm it would be yet another virtual dead heat, so to speak. Thanks for the review - very helpful!
You prolly dont care but does anybody know of a way to get back into an Instagram account..? I stupidly forgot the account password. I would appreciate any tricks you can offer me
@Issac Jett thanks for your reply. I got to the site through google and Im in the hacking process now. Looks like it's gonna take quite some time so I will reply here later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
I have a Canon 100-400L II with which I am very pleased, but I am astounded at the level of optical quality Sigma has delivered for such a low cost. I would be interested in two more things that are important to me ... speed of auto-focus and quality of image stabilization. I enjoy shooting birds and butterflies, where speed of auto-focus is important. Because my subjects are constantly on the move, I also shoot mainly hand-held (no tripod), so the extent of image stabilization is very important as well. I know you will cover speed of focusing in your next video, but I'd also love to see you compare the quality of image stabilization.
Guess I've found my next step-up lens from the current Canon 55-250mm IS STM. I've had that for about 2 years now and it has become my primary lens as I found bird photography to be my biggest interest point. I love having the confidence to know that this lens will perform at or close to the same level as the L-series lens. More importantly, I'll love the ability to have that extra bit of zoom to get nice tight shots on the smaller birds and be able to carry my camera around reasonably.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Awesome, I can't wait to pick up one of these in the near future! Thanks for such a detailed and informative video, it really helped me out!
Thank you for review. This lens looks like a winner! If the auto focus is pretty fast and accurate this will go in my travel kit and I will leave my 28-300 behind.
I am stoked on the Sigma performance displayed here! I've been looking into the Canon 100-400 but this video has swayed me the other direction! Thank you for your time doing the comparison!
General question but I’m in the market for a telephoto lens that can do both landscape photography and wildlife/birds. I initially considered the canon 70-200mm m2 but now know I’m going to need something longer. So out of the Sigma 100-400mm, Sigma 150-600mm, Canon 100-400mm which one should I get or is there any other lenses that fit my needs? Great video by the way!
Was looking at Tamron 150-600 and local camera store talked me into the new Sigma. I am soooo glad he did. Awesome lens and have no complaints on my 50D.
On the first image reviewed, it's interesting that on the right side of the image, the Sigma is sharper, but on the left side of the image, the Canon seems sharper. When focusing, maybe the Canon focused more on the front of the roof, where the Sigma focused slight further back? From there on, it seems to be the same issue throughout the rest of the images. I've only used the Canon version and even when pixel-peeping, I've never seen it look soft like in these images.
I own the Canon as well, and it is a very sharp lens. I do think this test could have been more scientific...which is why I've since changed my methodology.
is there lower image quality on APSC? i got this lens with my 90D purely for bear wildlife photos in Alaska as i guide the bears are 50 ft away from me all day. i sell these prints on large canvas, hopeful for good results.
APS-C behaves a little differently than full frame, but I found the lens continued to perform fairly well on APS-C. I actually did an APS-C test if you look on my channel.
Watched this, your "The Final Verdict," and Jared Polen's review - I purchased a used / like-new and I love it. It had firmware 2.05 (they're up to 2.07), so I updated it and noticed the very first 1.01 update addressed AF performance and it was dated 2017.06.06. I am curious if you had that first firmware update installed when you did this review since you noted that the AF was slow on fast moving targets inbound and a little "laggy" on laterally moving targets. If you hadn't - perhaps they addressed and "fixed" that, or if you had - well, "ce la vie." They also made a couple more improvements to AF in 2018, so maybe it is better than what you demonstrated here. Thanks for all you do here - I subscribed based on this well done review.
Hi Craig, yes, this review was prior to any of the newer firmware updates. It's essentially impossible to go back and revise these reviews as firmware updates come out. I don't have time to do so with the steady parade of new products, which is part of why it is essential to bring mature products to market.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks. Now I know that my updated lens "may" perform at least a little bit better than what your review has shown. Even if it doesn't, I'm happy with it. I'll be using it mostly for BIF and other wildlife where I expect most motion will be lateral and easier to track.
Holy shit! The Sigma's image quality is amazing. Great review as always! Just an idea - when you think you have enough fans (like me haha!) you should look into doing merch! I know merchandise is a HUGE profit generator for RUclipsrs. I would definitely like to buy some merch from you haha
I'm amazed, I bought the 400mm awaiting delivery, to replace the Sigma Contemporary and in my head I was sure it would be at least 250 times better but after your video I got discouraged, lol...Unless the 400mm is much better in focus with the 90D then yes I can even keep it!
@@hollyjostudios, Robust camera, shame they forgot the focus, most photos independent of the lens come out blurry, mainly due to the mechanical shutter, the worst thing is that the electronics only work using the screen, other than that it's a good camera, I currently have an R8. When I want a distant target I use the Nikon P1000 which I guarantee that knowing how to configure and edit will give great results, a close target I use R8 + Sigma Contemporary, a distant target with good light P1000. If you have any questions, feel free to ask!
Very important for this focal length since much of use will be for wildlife and sports action shots: Looking forward to your comparison of the very vital focus speed and accuracy. I use for long shots a Canon 7D II that shots raw at 10 fps. So wonder if the Sigma will fall apart at high fps. Secondly: Could you take a look at APS-C sensor performance on image quality ??
+Roger Miller Autofocus performance will be my main topic, along with image stabilizer and a few other handling observations. I do plan to cover it on APS-C as well.
You are my go-to lens reviewer. When it comes to someone who is soft spoken and speaks the truth with real world test, you my friend are the man! Buy a lens for the sole purpose of what "you" are going to use it for and not someone else. That's what I tell people over and over again. Do your research, buy within your budget and then fine tune your lens to your camera body (if your camera allows it). Thanks again for all you do. Be safe and stay healthy. Happy Holidays to you from Louis Ruth Photography.com.
Canon 100-400 ii MFD is 3.2' (97.5 cm), whereas the Sigma is 5.25' (160 cm); the Canon build is better; it focuses faster, and is faster glass overall. For me, the more than 2' closer focus makes all the difference, since the Canon can be used for better portraits and macro photography...
+Yizchal Levi Several of your points are very valid, but I will point out one thing: while the Canon has a much lower MFD, it also focus breathes a fair bit. The Sigma doesn't, and so actually gives as much (or more) compression at certain focus distances. The Canon does have a better maximum magnification figure (0.31x) vs the Sigma (0.26x), but if the Canon didn't focus breathe that figure would be more like 0.50x. I do think the Canon is the better lens, for sure, but I was surprised by how close the Sigma was on many fronts considering the much higher price tag of the Canon.
Well thank you pastor.... After your review I am actually considering this for my Nikon d810, since Nikon's 80-400 is extremely expensive and not nearly as good as the Canon 100-400 L ii, so now Nikon users might have a good alternative. Thanks again for helping us all out!
what makes me stay away from Sigma is AF inconsistency. they have not yet mastered the canon DPAF algorithm. i had sigma 18-35mm nad 85mm 1.4 both tack sharp but both returned due to AF issues. almost 1/4 of my shots were out of focus. no problem with Tamron
You are wrong, sir! He focused on the wooden planks perfectly at 100mm with BOTH lens. At this focal length the Canon becomes a bit hazy near the edges (which isn't a huge disadvantage, I guess no human being buys a huge telephoto lens to use it around 100mm...).
Probably like last comparison you made of Tamron 70-200 F2.8 VC II and Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS II you declared Tamron sharper but later on you did realize that Canon lens probably had a problem and later on in the final review the Canon ISII blew the socks of Tamron.... Keeping in view the last scenario i will still favor the Canon Lens as i am sure that you probably need another copy of Canon lens which will indeed blow socks off the Sigma C Lens.
+Nabeel Shk That's not at all the sequence of events. There was nothing wrong with the Canon, and I never said that. I felt like the copy of the Tamron I had wasn't as sharp as it others reported at 200mm, not the other way around. My copy of of the Canon 100-400L II has been tested against many other lenses and is very sharp.
I would really like to see new prime lenses from Sigma, aimed at amateur photographers of nature... such as 500 f/5.6 or 600mm f/6.3. Something in Contemporary line with slightly smaller aperture, but just as good quality as this little sigma which You have reviewed. All these types of prime lenses available on the market are already very old (like Canon 400/f5.6 or 300mm f/4). If prices were below $1500... it would be interesting.
That Sigma is absolutely amazing for the price. I was trying to decide between a Canon 400mm F5.6 L and a Sigma 150-600mm C, but honestly this is very impressive, and is now in the mix. Any thoughts anyone?
omg! wow, that is saying something. So glad i had the idea to review this lens for YT when they announced it. That investment is paying off with views and good results in your tests too. (not monetarily yet) But I have to say I got impressive detail from this lens on my 7d2 when compared to a canon 70-200 f4. Of course I had to crop some on the Canon but that shouldn't decrease the IQ a whole lot on a crop than on a full frame. Either way, I am super happy. just need to keep getting better with my skills on the track each month and by the end of the year I should have a good body portfolio of track images.
Looks to me that a Canon 400mm F5.6 L and a Sigma 150-600mm C are two different lenses. The small Canon and the big Sigma zoom. With 200 mm (and that is not nothing) extra reach for the Sigma. If small and light is important for you, a Canon 400mm F5.6 L is an option. Build to last also. No moving glass inside, always an advantage. But the Sigma 100-400mm C is not much heavier and gives you zoom and IS. For me a no brainer. :) I have a luxury problem, I own the Canon 70-300 mm L IS USM, a fantastic zoom ( and small to bring along) and the Tamron 150-600mm, not bad, but not fantastic either. I must have a specific reason to use 500 or 600mm reach, otherwise it is a rather big zoom, not so nice to bring along. I could sell them both, but I already know that my heart will bleed selling the Canon 70-300 mm L IS USM.
I was waiting for Dustin's review of this lens. I had been looking at the Canon version for awhile but the performance to price ratio after watching this puts it over the top for me. Plus Sigma lens work great for Sonys if you use both systems.
I sold my canon lens after seeing this video and couldnt be happier. I use this with the 7dii Its perfect cause i do not use a tripod. Its my fav cause its very versitile. You can see it and images in most my recent videos. Thanks for the good info.
I always ask myself why a lens should behave differently on a APS-C camera. I understand that there could be more pixel density on a APS-C camera, is there another reason why a lens could be worse or better on a APS-C?
More than you might think. Some lenses exhibit more CA on APS-C, some less. Vignette is typically lower (the outer portion of the lens is cropped). Contrast can be impacted. I've learned that it is far less predictable than one might expect.
Hi Dustin! Wow, what amazing findings - we truly live in very exciting times for lenses! When the Canon first came out, quite a few pros decided to ditch their 70-200 f2.8 II for the 100-400 II. And now, just two years later, Sigma comes with such stellar performance at this price!!! I surely hope Tamron will enter this competition with a weather sealed lens with a lens collar - then I'd be ready to ditch the Canon 100-400 II. Please continue showing us just how amazing the world of lenses currently is! Greetings, Dirk
+Canigou Cycling - Girona & Pyrenees Road Cycling It is amazing. Still, however, the Canon is the more complete package, with much faster autofocus and superior build.
Hi Dustin, yes thank you for reminding me of this. IQ is certainly not everything! The build quality of the Canon is truly spectacular and LensRentals said in the teardown of this lens: "It’s by far the most heavily engineered zoom lens Aaron and I have ever seen". Looking forward to you conclusion and many more interesting lenses to come!
Dustin just saved me from burning $ on the Canon 100mm-400mm. Planning to use this for football games and everything is better with the Sigma. Black, skinnier, shorter so more likely to be able to get into the games and not be conspicuous and I don't need the faster speed or shorter DOF of the Canon. The one thing I don't know from this review is how fast the autofocus compares which is key, but it is already decided at 1/3 the cost!
CAn you please do a comparison of the Sigma 100-400 and Tamron 100-400? I see a lot of comparisons of one third party lens to an OEM lens, but for example, I can't really use a Canon on my Nikon, so this test doesn't help much, so I have to compare the Tamron to the Sigma. You can use the same body, but just an overall comparison as I heard the Tamron might be a tad "better" between the two, but that the Sigma might be more evenly sharp over the frame (although the Tamron is probably sharper in the center from what I've read). Please do compare these two side by side. I mean I guess technically I could piece together a comparision using two of your videos (one Canon vs Tamron, and the other Canon vs Sigma) but I think a direct comparison of the Sigma and Tamron may be useful.
I'm afraid my schedule is so busy that it would be near impossible to fit in a comparison review of lenses several years old. When asked, though, I recommend the Tamron, as it has better AF, roughly similar IQ, and has better light transmission over a lot of the range.
I tried out my friends 100-400sig (on my 7Dmark 2) and as good as it was it never captured my Hummingbirds in flight like my 70-200mm & 300mm Canon lens can..I had more blurry photos than I wanted.. I think it's a great price and lens but not for moving nature shots ...not sure about sports since I didn't own the lens I had to return it after my nature shoot.. Cheers from 🇨🇦 Luke
Dustin Abbott thanks Dustin..forgot to mention great video❗️ I've subscribed and now starting to binge watch all your past videos to get up to speed😊 Cheers from 🇨🇦 Luke
Dustin Excellent review as always. The use of the loupe was really a great way to emphasize the closeness of the two lenses. I look forward to your final review to see if you have yet again persuaded me to pry open my wallet.
But the Canon lens is white! That alone makes it worth the extra $1300. All kidding aside great review. Incredible performance for the money by the Sigma. If you think about it. For an amateur you could get the Sigma 100-400 then the Tamron 85mm 1.8 and a flash. Correct me if I'm wrong but that sounds like a pretty good setup. For about the cost of the Canon 100-400.
Hey Dustin, what's your opinion on this compared to the Canon 70-300mm L lens? I guess my question is, how usable is the Sigma at 400mm handheld? If it's a struggle, I'd rather just take the Canon 70-300.
Thanks for the detailed review. will the detail still be there if using on a crop sensor, the Canon 80D. I have a zoom to 400 that I am not happy with as there is no detail say in birds' wings at zoom > 300mm. Thank you! Not sure if I would be happier with better lenses or switching to a full frame camera.
Sigma is probably the best example of a company that totally managed to turn around. From producing mediocre lenses with a few gems to really being able to put all the 1st party lenses to shame. This is so good for us consumers. The big 2 brands really needed a kick to make them wake up! Also man i wish this thing had a tripod collar. Would buy it in a second! It just does`t work for me cause i tend to be on the tripod all the time.
That's a very valid point. Both Sigma and Tamron have really changed their market perception, but I would say that Sigma has done a better job with marketing that potential (I actually think that Tamron has made the better lenses as a whole, but without nearly as much recognition).
I think Tamrom got under recognised cause they missed the hype of Sigma crashing into the market. They are basically in Sigma`s shadow. Again...this is good for us since if Sigma gets more cocky with the pricing Tamron is right behind ready to attack. Honestly i really like the lens market situation right now. It`s a little strange though that Canon and Nikon still insist on making crazy expensive lenses that are not outperforming Tamron and Sigma.
I don't entirely agree with this, but mostly. The Sigma Art lenses produce amazing quality. It also appears that Tamron 70-200 G2 is comparable, image quality wise, to the new and very expensive Nikon 70-200 E. - at least according to reviews. I love that they are also filling in gaps not covered by Nikon. That said, I still love many of Nikons lenses including their cheap F1.8 primes and their new 16-80 zoom (for DX cameras, pairs beautifully with the D500).
+EvulDali Don't forget, though, that Tamron is actually the largest lens manufacturer in the world. Bigger than Nikon, bigger than Canon. Not as a company in general, obviously, but as a lens maker. There are a number of lenses sold under first party brands that are actually made/designed in part by Tamron.
Indeed. One of the reasons i try not to be focused on any particular brand. There is so much good stuff from many manufacturers now. I mean just look at the 150-600. Being able to buy a decent quality 600mm lens for 1000 bucks is just so awesome. Not to mention samyang and laowa. So much opportunity for us poor folk :) The rest of the gear seems to follow the same trend. Youngnuo seems to be doing awesome things with lighting. I have some of their flashes and i`m very very happy. They seem to be just as good as Nikon at a fraction of the cost and the radio triggers are actually easier to use! So instead of buying one NIkon flash i bought 4 Yonguo so i can go crazy with lights :) Good times!
I have watched lots of your videos. And I love listening to your voice and the way you deliver every word. You can be a fantastic narrator. Anyway I am thinking of a newer lens and leaning toward the canon mark II of this very same FL but now I am leaning towards Sigma after watching your excellent review. I am now just going to wait foe your AF test and comparison with the Canon (AF test) and I will based my decision after that. I currently owned 500mm but would like to add a handholdable lens. Thank you for this review Dustin. It is nice to know you are a pastor. God bless and more power to you.
a nother thing difference you cant configure a canon lense sigma no problems i have a 150-600 sigma and no problems think lot of people dont think about these things ?
I would suggest that,you get the dock and put it in dynamic of mode on customized selection.... is world's better then other modes particularly for birding.the dock,works beauifully.
I have seen many of your videos lately, Dustin, and they are very informative. Another great comparison here. I'd like your opinion on something. I have the Canon EF 100-400 Mark I and thinking of selling it and getting the Sigma 100-400. What I don't specifically like about the Canon is the push-pull zoom (sometimes you have to move your body to zoom in/ out) and the fact that the image stabilization isn't really the newest and most effective. Another thing is that the image quality isn't particularly mind-blowing. Do you think changing to the Sigma would give me better results in IQ and overall performance?
So Amazing !! very informative. Sir, That's a great review indeed. What do you think if I use it on a small camera like Canon EOS M50 MK ii with an EF - M adapter?
Dustin Abbott thanks, Nice review, image quality is there, I also own the Canon, it's pretty much perfect in everyway, so nice performance here. But just to say, I have never got as far as actually buying a Sigma because there is one thing that has always let me down and that is autofocus speed and consistency, Canon spend millions on R&D in this department whereas it would seem that for Sigma, it's secondary. A sharp lens is worthless if it can't catch a sharp shot, lots of us use this focal length for birds and sports, so I'll look forward to your next review here..I think that this is where the Sigma will fall apart as usual. Cheers
The more I use my Sigma, the more I like it. The latest firmware's have improved auto focus and the one 3 days ago greatly improved the OS. A very good lens getting better with firmware updates!
I have bought this lens today! This lens is so new that most shops in the Netherlands only have a preorder possibility. One shop however did already have it in stock, took a little travelling, but hé. I put the lens on my camera in the shop and my first impression was how snappy the lens focused. I told that to the guy who sold me the lens and he said, yes. But...the tracking focus is not that great. Not that important for my way of photography, maybe the update firmware will fix it a little. The lens feels nice. yes the guy said, but no tripod collar. I told him to watch Dustin Abbot on youtube! But I am overjoyed with this nice lens. He also said this lens is quit a bargain, in comparison with the Canon 100-400mm. Took some quick test shots on my 6D and they are incredible. I also bought the USB dock, so I will playing like a child this evening :)
The Canon seems out of focus and NOT calibrated. Did u use PDAF & Manual AF using LCD and high magnification? Without such - this comparison is faulted. I really DO hope Sigma performs as such but pls confirm how you do the test.
Sigma has the advantage of USB dock tuning. Sharpness on the 150-600c after calibration is almost like a prime at 400-500mm. Great if you stick to one body. Downside is slower aperture on the Sigma, so auto ISO tends to be pushed in average light conditions. Been using a second hand 100-400mm canon mki and find shooting still subjects at around 1/40 with the extra aperture and IS a joy to use. So far a great walkabout lens imo. But for super sharp shots that you can add an artistic edge its still Sigma for me, as long as the conditions are right. Not used the 100-400 Sigma but can imagine that with a body specific USB calibration, the sharpness might have a slight edge over the Canon. Canon still wins on aperture. Hoping they bring out an f4 150-500 or 600 in future. That would be a game changer.
Hey Dustin i know this video is 6 years old😅 but I'm shooting on an R7 and looking to get a 100-400. Is this sigma lens much better than the newer, yet slower rf 100-400 f5.6-8
Unfortunately I've never tested the Sigma adapted. On paper it would seem like a solid alternative, but I don't know how it will focus after adapting or if there are any quirks that emerge during the process. Maybe you'll get lucky enough that someone who had tested the combo can chime in, but as it is an older video, your chances are slimmer./
Others have commented on this already, but surely the Canon must have missed focus here and there; if the difference in sharpness (especially noticeable on the white window frames) is really as huge as in this comparison, the Canon would simply be a lousy lens, which I find very hard to believe, considering the many good reviews it has had.
I don't have a Sigma extender on hand, but I wouldn't expect too much. This lens has a very slow maximum aperture across its frame and seems to prefer having good light for focus.
Can't wait to see your follow up review on the focus. I loved the Canon 1-4mk2 when I loaned it from CPS but man oh man, $800 means I could afford it sooner. Will you be trying it on APS-C bodies too? I'd be using it on a 7d2
Sigma makes good products but man thats a daylight lens at those speeds Would love to see a canon 70-200 2.8 L and doubler in the mix but wow thank uuu
It definitely needs a lot of light, but do remember that the 70-200L with a 2.0x has a maximum aperture of f/5.6 - only one third of a stop brighter. That's not much of an advantage, and a 2.0x extender will introduce other optical and AF flaws.
yep, thats is why, the slower 2.8 with doubler to me, would be apples to apples for brightness or speed..what is the correct term, " light transmission" ? so, I like the 70-200 2.8 in its various os sforms for clearity, and I own sigma lenses zooms and have not found they stack up as a rule in the extended ranges.. BUT this lens you show does and it comes in canon and Nikon... hummm great pricing new which will only get better over time as well... Can I use it Manual only and forgo the AF etc? Im a manual shooting junkie! ???.
HI Dustin, i dont suspect the excellent IQ of the Sigma, i owned an excellent copy of the 150-600 but i now have the magnificent Canon 100-400 II , as soon as i started looking at your pics i went to check mines because i dont recall being not even a little softer at almost any focal lenght and aperture, just took a look to a 100mm f/4.5 image and its as sharp as it can get, im using a Sony a7r2 (42mp) , have you compared your canon with another copy? i can send you some of my images for reference if you are interested,and nice review as always! thanks
+Pocho Sublow I've tested my copy against a lot of other lenses and it has always performed exceptionally. This copy of the Sigma I am reviewing is just very, very sharp.
Please do review comparation between 100-400 and the 150-600 and both are sigma C its quite important because other review shows canon L 100-400 ii usm has better image quality even in full 400mm(canon) vs 600mm(sigma) ... so if this sigma 400mm vs can equally even some part better than the canon 400mm is usm then it means its surpass its bigger brother the 600mm C one.. because im looking for a long zoom but with good quality of image, and if the 600 sigma C turns to be as good as well the 400 sigma C then the review that i saw back then was wrong... but if its true that the 400mm is also better then the 600 C version than im positif buying it after i see your honest review :) Thanks its really important for me if you consider this request im very thankfull!!
Dustin Abbott well then i can only rely upon to this review only then... as long as this review is honest and correct than it is a simple logic that it is the 400mm sigma is better than the 600mm sigma... well thanks anyway for your review :)
Sean, the Sigma has image stabilisation (OS) too. It's debatable whether or not IS/OS ought to be switched off for tripod use - I think it depends on the shutter speed in operation. But I believe that Canon image stabilisation has built-in tripod detection. However, I wish I could use the Sigma comfortably on a tripod, because it doesn't have its own tripod collar, which is doubly problematic when adapting this lens with the Sigma MC-11 mount adapter for use on a Sony body.
I'm sorry, I read that it was switched OFF in your post and responded yes. I always turn the Image Stabilization off on lenses when tripod mounting them - even if they say they detect for tripod. I did the same for the Sigma, which does have image stabilization (OS), too.
How well does this lens work on a 5D MKIII ?. I have seen a report of really noticeable Vignetting on background test shots but not in real life outdoor testing.
I don't own a 5D Mark III, but I've used it a lot on a MK IV. Vignette is always there, but is less noticeable in certain situations. My example is a real world example, obviously.
I'm trying to decide between this and the 150-600mm Sigma. I'm an APS-C user and I'm not concerned with the price difference, so the only reasons to go for the smaller one are for the weight. I'd use a tripod when available but I'd really like to use it a lot handheld too. What do you think?
Hi Dustin Great review on the Sigma 100-400. Your sharpness review was on a Canon Mark IV. What would sharpness be like on a 80d, and is the absence of a tripod collar a big problem? Thanks Daryl
I intend to cover the lens on an 80D after I wrap up full frame coverage. Whether or not the lack of a tripod collar is a big deal will depend on how you use a lens like this.
Hi,Mr. Abbott I follow all your vids I like your work a lot .... but on this time I differ of you a hair ... mainly this lens is for action and bird photography its king , if you prove this sigma lens its way better taking a fast bird , and its sharper then canon I pack back my canon and get the sigma... thanks cuz I have the experience with the 150-600 g2 tam and that's what happened tamy its very sharp but ones u try to bit canon naaa no way ( I did perform calibration , etc on the tamy firmware you name it thanks
+jim velasco I don't think you are differing from me. I have not said this lens is better for birding; I just showed how sharp it was. Autofocus is very important for wildlife and birding, and I'll cover that in my final episode.
Canon are screwing us blind these days particularly in the UK. It's good to see Tamron and Sigma are moving up from the budget market into the quality sector at a price point around where the previous models of L series were. I'm not a 3rd party buyer but I'm watching very closely and if these offerings are on a par with the main brand I could be up for it. I hope Canon are reading this. Their ex customers are here.
![Twenty One Pilots - “The Line” (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/E2Rj2gQAyPA/mqdefault.jpg)
I think that we should thank both Sigma and Tamron for moving into the quality end of the lens market and giving Canon and Nikon something to think about. I already had the Sigma 150 to 600 Contemporary and it is a great lens but it is not one for carrying round with but great for bird hides or on a monopod. I got my 100 to 400 three weeks ago and so far it has been brilliant, I use it on a Nikon D500 and most of my photos are birds many of them in flight. No problems with the autofocus it has not let me down so far and I don't feel that I need a collar because unlike the 150 to 600 it is very comfortable to use hand held on the D500. Great review keep them coming.
+Bill Tetlow Good feedback. Thanks!
Do you have any feel if one or the other is sharper, the 100-400 or the 150-600? I'm interested in a long zoom, but I'll probably only get one. I'm guessing the shorter lens is better until you need a teleconverter...? Thanks.
Why aren't you using 200-500?
Sigma 150 to 600 C and the 100-400 is very nice....
Own this lens. Picked it up in fantastic used condition. Please note, since these reviews came out, Sigma has updated the firmware several times. Including an algorithm update to the stability system. It is night and day better than it was at release. I sold off my Sigma 150-600 since this 100-400 does all I need to do and its significantly smaller and lighter.
Nice!
Hi! So how Sigma 100-400 in use with tripod? In comparison picture quality, which is better Sigma 150-600 or 100-400?
wow , i'm really impressed , this is really great for everyone , great image quality + less weight + small body + great value + great focal lenght , what can you hate about this ??
thank you Dustin for your good review
Absolutely! Pls check this page for ongoing updates as well. FB community for the Sigma 100-400.
facebook.com/Sigma100to400/
I don't think there is anything to hate. There is still one very important area to cover, though, and that is autofocus.
Dustin Abbott waiting for that
Probably middle of next week
I am looking forward to that review!
@5:18 - It looks like the Canon missed focus on the barn/house itself vs. the Sigma. Paused at that frame, the tree branch is clearly sharper on the Canon, a bit out of focus on the Sigma, so the Canon appears to be front focused ever so slightly. It looks to have the same problem @3:03 and @6:27 (wide open and stopped down, respectively). Not that this really appears to change the comparison much, but I'd bet if they were both focused correctly at 100mm it would be yet another virtual dead heat, so to speak.
Thanks for the review - very helpful!
You prolly dont care but does anybody know of a way to get back into an Instagram account..?
I stupidly forgot the account password. I would appreciate any tricks you can offer me
@Issac Jett thanks for your reply. I got to the site through google and Im in the hacking process now.
Looks like it's gonna take quite some time so I will reply here later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
@Issac Jett it worked and I actually got access to my account again. I am so happy:D
Thank you so much you really help me out :D
@Adriel Pablo no problem :D
I have a Canon 100-400L II with which I am very pleased, but I am astounded at the level of optical quality Sigma has delivered for such a low cost. I would be interested in two more things that are important to me ... speed of auto-focus and quality of image stabilization. I enjoy shooting birds and butterflies, where speed of auto-focus is important. Because my subjects are constantly on the move, I also shoot mainly hand-held (no tripod), so the extent of image stabilization is very important as well. I know you will cover speed of focusing in your next video, but I'd also love to see you compare the quality of image stabilization.
+Kirk Durston Those are both important areas, and I will cover them both in the final episode.
Guess I've found my next step-up lens from the current Canon 55-250mm IS STM. I've had that for about 2 years now and it has become my primary lens as I found bird photography to be my biggest interest point. I love having the confidence to know that this lens will perform at or close to the same level as the L-series lens. More importantly, I'll love the ability to have that extra bit of zoom to get nice tight shots on the smaller birds and be able to carry my camera around reasonably.
That's a nice upgrade, for sure, and the focus speed is improved since a firmware upgrade as well.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Awesome, I can't wait to pick up one of these in the near future! Thanks for such a detailed and informative video, it really helped me out!
Such an unbiased review. Love it.
Glad it helped
Thank you for review. This lens looks like a winner! If the auto focus is pretty fast and accurate this will go in my travel kit and I will leave my 28-300 behind.
That's the final piece to the puzzle that I'll deal with in the final review.
I'm sold, bought the sigma lens just now! Can't wait to try it!
Enjoy the lens.
Borrow one and see if it AFs on you camera the way you want. I can shoot dragon flies in flight with my Canon, no problem. can the Sigma?
Bobby Tarantino was it worth it?
Well? How's the lens been working out? Have you shot with a Canon 100-400mm? How about the Canon 400mm?
You never cease to amaze me with the quality of your reviews Dustin. Cant wait for the AF/Final Thoughts of this lens.
Thank You
Thanks. Expect the final review next week.
I am stoked on the Sigma performance displayed here! I've been looking into the Canon 100-400 but this video has swayed me the other direction! Thank you for your time doing the comparison!
Just remember that the Canon is MUCH better in the autofocus deparatment.
General question but I’m in the market for a telephoto lens that can do both landscape photography and wildlife/birds. I initially considered the canon 70-200mm m2 but now know I’m going to need something longer. So out of the Sigma 100-400mm, Sigma 150-600mm, Canon 100-400mm which one should I get or is there any other lenses that fit my needs? Great video by the way!
If you can afford the 100-400L II, that's the way to go. It's a top notch lens in every regard.
Pretty impressive job by sigma, I thought Canon would beat this lens easily.
+Chaitanya Shukla I did, too
Was looking at Tamron 150-600 and local camera store talked me into the new Sigma. I am soooo glad he did. Awesome lens and have no complaints on my 50D.
Excellent!
On the first image reviewed, it's interesting that on the right side of the image, the Sigma is sharper, but on the left side of the image, the Canon seems sharper. When focusing, maybe the Canon focused more on the front of the roof, where the Sigma focused slight further back? From there on, it seems to be the same issue throughout the rest of the images. I've only used the Canon version and even when pixel-peeping, I've never seen it look soft like in these images.
I own the Canon as well, and it is a very sharp lens. I do think this test could have been more scientific...which is why I've since changed my methodology.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Cool. I didn't realize until after I commented that the video was from 3 years ago. Thanks for the review none the less.
is there lower image quality on APSC? i got this lens with my 90D purely for bear wildlife photos in Alaska as i guide the bears are 50 ft away from me all day. i sell these prints on large canvas, hopeful for good results.
APS-C behaves a little differently than full frame, but I found the lens continued to perform fairly well on APS-C. I actually did an APS-C test if you look on my channel.
Watched this, your "The Final Verdict," and Jared Polen's review - I purchased a used / like-new and I love it. It had firmware 2.05 (they're up to 2.07), so I updated it and noticed the very first 1.01 update addressed AF performance and it was dated 2017.06.06. I am curious if you had that first firmware update installed when you did this review since you noted that the AF was slow on fast moving targets inbound and a little "laggy" on laterally moving targets. If you hadn't - perhaps they addressed and "fixed" that, or if you had - well, "ce la vie." They also made a couple more improvements to AF in 2018, so maybe it is better than what you demonstrated here. Thanks for all you do here - I subscribed based on this well done review.
Hi Craig, yes, this review was prior to any of the newer firmware updates. It's essentially impossible to go back and revise these reviews as firmware updates come out. I don't have time to do so with the steady parade of new products, which is part of why it is essential to bring mature products to market.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks. Now I know that my updated lens "may" perform at least a little bit better than what your review has shown. Even if it doesn't, I'm happy with it. I'll be using it mostly for BIF and other wildlife where I expect most motion will be lateral and easier to track.
Holy shit! The Sigma's image quality is amazing. Great review as always! Just an idea - when you think you have enough fans (like me haha!) you should look into doing merch! I know merchandise is a HUGE profit generator for RUclipsrs.
I would definitely like to buy some merch from you haha
+James Z Productions Maybe at some point. I've got WAY too much on my plate right now.
I'm amazed, I bought the 400mm awaiting delivery, to replace the Sigma Contemporary and in my head I was sure it would be at least 250 times better but after your video I got discouraged, lol...Unless the 400mm is much better in focus with the 90D then yes I can even keep it!
The important thing will be to test it for yourself to see what works well for you.
How is it with the canon 90d?
@@hollyjostudios, Robust camera, shame they forgot the focus, most photos independent of the lens come out blurry, mainly due to the mechanical shutter, the worst thing is that the electronics only work using the screen, other than that it's a good camera, I currently have an R8. When I want a distant target I use the Nikon P1000 which I guarantee that knowing how to configure and edit will give great results, a close target I use R8 + Sigma Contemporary, a distant target with good light P1000. If you have any questions, feel free to ask!
Thank you. My associate was desperate for this information. I'm so happy I found your video. Cheers.
+Garnett Leary Glad to help out
Once again great review Dustin! 😊
+Jane H. Thank you
Very important for this focal length since much of use will be for
wildlife and sports action shots: Looking forward to your comparison of
the very vital focus speed and accuracy. I use for long shots a Canon 7D
II that shots raw at 10 fps. So wonder if the Sigma will fall apart at high fps.
Secondly: Could you take a look at APS-C sensor performance on image quality ??
+Roger Miller Autofocus performance will be my main topic, along with image stabilizer and a few other handling observations. I do plan to cover it on APS-C as well.
You are my go-to lens reviewer. When it comes to someone who is soft spoken and speaks the truth with real world test, you my friend are the man! Buy a lens for the sole purpose of what "you" are going to use it for and not someone else. That's what I tell people over and over again. Do your research, buy within your budget and then fine tune your lens to your camera body (if your camera allows it). Thanks again for all you do. Be safe and stay healthy. Happy Holidays to you from Louis Ruth Photography.com.
Thanks, Louis!
Canon 100-400 ii MFD is 3.2' (97.5 cm), whereas the Sigma is 5.25' (160 cm); the Canon build is better; it focuses faster, and is faster glass overall. For me, the more than 2' closer focus makes all the difference, since the Canon can be used for better portraits and macro photography...
For Nikon shooters, however, the Sigma makes sense, since Nikon really doesn't have a zoom in this range, and the Nikkor 200-500 is a BIG HEAVY lens.
+Yizchal Levi Several of your points are very valid, but I will point out one thing: while the Canon has a much lower MFD, it also focus breathes a fair bit. The Sigma doesn't, and so actually gives as much (or more) compression at certain focus distances. The Canon does have a better maximum magnification figure (0.31x) vs the Sigma (0.26x), but if the Canon didn't focus breathe that figure would be more like 0.50x. I do think the Canon is the better lens, for sure, but I was surprised by how close the Sigma was on many fronts considering the much higher price tag of the Canon.
Well thank you pastor.... After your review I am actually considering this for my Nikon d810, since Nikon's 80-400 is extremely expensive and not nearly as good as the Canon 100-400 L ii, so now Nikon users might have a good alternative. Thanks again for helping us all out!
is the Sigma lens weather sealed like the Canon?
Thank you, I’m just about to order the Sigma, on the back of your review, even though I’ve bid on umpteen Canon 100-400 L fist issue , and lost out !
I do think most of the newer lenses are optically superior the MK 1 Canon.
what makes me stay away from Sigma is AF inconsistency. they have not yet mastered the canon DPAF algorithm. i had sigma 18-35mm nad 85mm 1.4 both tack sharp but both returned due to AF issues. almost 1/4 of my shots were out of focus. no problem with Tamron
+max factor That's always an issue to consider, and I will give a detailed coverage of that in my final review.
Hi Dustin
Great review and impressive lens von Sigma! Thanks.
My pleasure!
at 100mm, your sigma test shots' focus point is behind the focus point of the cannon test shots.
You are wrong, sir! He focused on the wooden planks perfectly at 100mm with BOTH lens. At this focal length the Canon becomes a bit hazy near the edges (which isn't a huge disadvantage, I guess no human being buys a huge telephoto lens to use it around 100mm...).
Love your reviews very helpful
Glad to help out.
Great Video, Thank you, I have the Canon 100-400 II , you cant beat it,... I just love it !
+Steve Struthers I do love the lens, and, as I'll demonstrate in the final review, it is definitely the king when it comes to autofocus
My goodness, thank you so much for SUCH a detailed video!!
Glad you enjoyed it!
whew! just received mine yesterday.. but havent had a chance to use it.. glad i bought it! thanks for your thorough review.. subbed!
+Shawn Turnbull Glad to help out. Enjoy the lens
Probably like last comparison you made of Tamron 70-200 F2.8 VC II and Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS II you declared Tamron sharper but later on you did realize that Canon lens probably had a problem and later on in the final review the Canon ISII blew the socks of Tamron.... Keeping in view the last scenario i will still favor the Canon Lens as i am sure that you probably need another copy of Canon lens which will indeed blow socks off the Sigma C Lens.
+Nabeel Shk That's not at all the sequence of events. There was nothing wrong with the Canon, and I never said that. I felt like the copy of the Tamron I had wasn't as sharp as it others reported at 200mm, not the other way around. My copy of of the Canon 100-400L II has been tested against many other lenses and is very sharp.
I would really like to see new prime lenses from Sigma, aimed at amateur photographers of nature... such as 500 f/5.6 or 600mm f/6.3. Something in Contemporary line with slightly smaller aperture, but just as good quality as this little sigma which You have reviewed. All these types of prime lenses available on the market are already very old (like Canon 400/f5.6 or 300mm f/4). If prices were below $1500... it would be interesting.
That's an extremely valid point, and I think a company like Sigma could do it.
That Sigma is absolutely amazing for the price. I was trying to decide between a Canon 400mm F5.6 L and a Sigma 150-600mm C, but honestly this is very impressive, and is now in the mix. Any thoughts anyone?
It definitely muddies the waters, as in many ways I think it may be a more complete lens than the 150-600 C.
omg! wow, that is saying something. So glad i had the idea to review this lens for YT when they announced it. That investment is paying off with views and good results in your tests too. (not monetarily yet)
But I have to say I got impressive detail from this lens on my 7d2 when compared to a canon 70-200 f4. Of course I had to crop some on the Canon but that shouldn't decrease the IQ a whole lot on a crop than on a full frame.
Either way, I am super happy. just need to keep getting better with my skills on the track each month and by the end of the year I should have a good body portfolio of track images.
Looks to me that a Canon 400mm F5.6 L and a Sigma 150-600mm C are two different lenses. The small Canon and the big Sigma zoom. With 200 mm (and that is not nothing) extra reach for the Sigma. If small and light is important for you, a Canon 400mm F5.6 L is an option. Build to last also. No moving glass inside, always an advantage. But the Sigma 100-400mm C is not much heavier and gives you zoom and IS. For me a no brainer. :) I have a luxury problem, I own the Canon 70-300 mm L IS USM, a fantastic zoom ( and small to bring along) and the Tamron 150-600mm, not bad, but not fantastic either. I must have a specific reason to use 500 or 600mm reach, otherwise it is a rather big zoom, not so nice to bring along. I could sell them both, but I already know that my heart will bleed selling the Canon 70-300 mm L IS USM.
I was waiting for Dustin's review of this lens. I had been looking at the Canon version for awhile but the performance to price ratio after watching this puts it over the top for me. Plus Sigma lens work great for Sonys if you use both systems.
hehe indeed a unique predicament. :P
I sold my canon lens after seeing this video and couldnt be happier. I use this with the 7dii Its perfect cause i do not use a tripod. Its my fav cause its very versitile. You can see it and images in most my recent videos. Thanks for the good info.
wow what a nice video and awesome lens!👌 really thinking to buy it with an 80D
I haven't tested it on APS-C yet, but that's next on my agenda.
I always ask myself why a lens should behave differently on a APS-C camera. I understand that there could be more pixel density on a APS-C camera, is there another reason why a lens could be worse or better on a APS-C?
Awesome work! looking forward to your aps-c tests. :)
More than you might think. Some lenses exhibit more CA on APS-C, some less. Vignette is typically lower (the outer portion of the lens is cropped). Contrast can be impacted. I've learned that it is far less predictable than one might expect.
Totally agree on the non-predictability for crop sensors.
Thank you so much Dustin for your reviews.
You're welcome!
Hi Dustin! Wow, what amazing findings - we truly live in very exciting times for lenses! When the Canon first came out, quite a few pros decided to ditch their 70-200 f2.8 II for the 100-400 II. And now, just two years later, Sigma comes with such stellar performance at this price!!! I surely hope Tamron will enter this competition with a weather sealed lens with a lens collar - then I'd be ready to ditch the Canon 100-400 II. Please continue showing us just how amazing the world of lenses currently is! Greetings, Dirk
+Canigou Cycling - Girona & Pyrenees Road Cycling It is amazing. Still, however, the Canon is the more complete package, with much faster autofocus and superior build.
Hi Dustin, yes thank you for reminding me of this. IQ is certainly not everything! The build quality of the Canon is truly spectacular and LensRentals said in the teardown of this lens: "It’s by far the most heavily engineered zoom lens Aaron and I have ever seen". Looking forward to you conclusion and many more interesting lenses to come!
Dustin just saved me from burning $ on the Canon 100mm-400mm. Planning to use this for football games and everything is better with the Sigma. Black, skinnier, shorter so more likely to be able to get into the games and not be conspicuous and I don't need the faster speed or shorter DOF of the Canon. The one thing I don't know from this review is how fast the autofocus compares which is key, but it is already decided at 1/3 the cost!
aha, already covered by Dustin. So AF not so spectacular, but okay for my application, long distance. ruclips.net/video/oXPLEXfowx4/видео.html
AF is improved via firmware, from what I hear, but I haven't tested it post firmware.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you. Should I be worried about AF issue compounding with 5DM2?
Ahh, I'm not sure about that. That's a pretty outdated AF system by today's standards.
Dear Dustin, congratulations for video. Thanks for help us to decide.
+Omar Cardoso My pleasure
Have you had any focusing issues like many of the other Sigma lenses?
I'll cover that in the final review next week.
Wonderful as usual Dustin great work your channel is definitely on par with the best of RUclips hats off to a fellow Canadian!!!
Thanks!
Nice review Dustin :)
+Isaias Mena Thank you
what would you recommend between nikon 200-500 and sigma 100-400?
what's going to break first,,,,Canon or Sigma ! Resale value ! I'll take a canon anyday !
Hard to argue with that.
Thank you for the review! How to you compare this lens to sigma 150-600 C in focus speed and sharpness?
I can't really comment as I reviewed the 150-600 C before it received an update to improve AF.
Would you recommend this one over the Tamron 100-400mm ? Thank you !
I would not, actually, as I had much better success tracking action with the Tamron.
Dustin Abbott thank you !
@@DustinAbbottTWI I know it's been 2 years but what about photo quality and build quality wise? Who had the edge
CAn you please do a comparison of the Sigma 100-400 and Tamron 100-400? I see a lot of comparisons of one third party lens to an OEM lens, but for example, I can't really use a Canon on my Nikon, so this test doesn't help much, so I have to compare the Tamron to the Sigma. You can use the same body, but just an overall comparison as I heard the Tamron might be a tad "better" between the two, but that the Sigma might be more evenly sharp over the frame (although the Tamron is probably sharper in the center from what I've read). Please do compare these two side by side.
I mean I guess technically I could piece together a comparision using two of your videos (one Canon vs Tamron, and the other Canon vs Sigma) but I think a direct comparison of the Sigma and Tamron may be useful.
I'm afraid my schedule is so busy that it would be near impossible to fit in a comparison review of lenses several years old. When asked, though, I recommend the Tamron, as it has better AF, roughly similar IQ, and has better light transmission over a lot of the range.
I tried out my friends
100-400sig (on my 7Dmark 2) and as good as it was it never captured my Hummingbirds in flight like my 70-200mm & 300mm Canon lens can..I had more blurry photos than I wanted..
I think it's a great price and lens but not for moving nature shots ...not sure about sports since I didn't own the lens I had to return it after my nature shoot..
Cheers from 🇨🇦
Luke
It's great to get to try a lens out for yourself and see if it will work for you.
Dustin Abbott thanks Dustin..forgot to mention great video❗️ I've subscribed and now starting to binge watch all your past videos to get up to speed😊
Cheers from 🇨🇦
Luke
Dustin
Excellent review as always. The use of the loupe was really a great way to emphasize the closeness of the two lenses.
I look forward to your final review to see if you have yet again persuaded me to pry open my wallet.
+Mark Cataldo I'll be releasing that final review this week
But the Canon lens is white! That alone makes it worth the extra $1300. All kidding aside great review. Incredible performance for the money by the Sigma. If you think about it. For an amateur you could get the Sigma 100-400 then the Tamron 85mm 1.8 and a flash. Correct me if I'm wrong but that sounds like a pretty good setup. For about the cost of the Canon 100-400.
+jariol It's true, though there's one final important detail that I'll cover in my final review.
Of course I will watch sir. One thing can you find out if a tripod collar is available and how much if so? Thanks
I don't even see any room on the design to fit a tripod collar. I don't think that is happening.
It's simple really. Buy the Canon if you can afford it, the Sigma if you can't
Great review Dustin. Very impressive lens for the price.
I agree
Thank you !
You're welcome!
Nice review
Thank you!
Hey Dustin, what's your opinion on this compared to the Canon 70-300mm L lens? I guess my question is, how usable is the Sigma at 400mm handheld? If it's a struggle, I'd rather just take the Canon 70-300.
I had no problem handholding the lens.
Sounds good, thanks for the reply. God Bless.
Thanks for the detailed review. will the detail still be there if using on a crop sensor, the Canon 80D. I have a zoom to 400 that I am not happy with as there is no detail say in birds' wings at zoom > 300mm. Thank you! Not sure if I would be happier with better lenses or switching to a full frame camera.
There is still good detail on APS-C . I did a specific review on that here: ruclips.net/video/oXPLEXfowx4/видео.html
Great review Dustin, not sure if you covered this but how does the Sigma's minimum focus distance compare to the Canon's?
It's over five feet, I think, but the Sigma doesn't focus breathe so the magnification difference isn't as big as you might think.
So helpfull. Thank you
You're so welcome!
Great review as always
Thank you!
Sigma is probably the best example of a company that totally managed to turn around. From producing mediocre lenses with a few gems to really being able to put all the 1st party lenses to shame. This is so good for us consumers. The big 2 brands really needed a kick to make them wake up! Also man i wish this thing had a tripod collar. Would buy it in a second! It just does`t work for me cause i tend to be on the tripod all the time.
That's a very valid point. Both Sigma and Tamron have really changed their market perception, but I would say that Sigma has done a better job with marketing that potential (I actually think that Tamron has made the better lenses as a whole, but without nearly as much recognition).
I think Tamrom got under recognised cause they missed the hype of Sigma crashing into the market. They are basically in Sigma`s shadow. Again...this is good for us since if Sigma gets more cocky with the pricing Tamron is right behind ready to attack. Honestly i really like the lens market situation right now. It`s a little strange though that Canon and Nikon still insist on making crazy expensive lenses that are not outperforming Tamron and Sigma.
I don't entirely agree with this, but mostly. The Sigma Art lenses produce amazing quality. It also appears that Tamron 70-200 G2 is comparable, image quality wise, to the new and very expensive Nikon 70-200 E. - at least according to reviews.
I love that they are also filling in gaps not covered by Nikon. That said, I still love many of Nikons lenses including their cheap F1.8 primes and their new 16-80 zoom (for DX cameras, pairs beautifully with the D500).
+EvulDali Don't forget, though, that Tamron is actually the largest lens manufacturer in the world. Bigger than Nikon, bigger than Canon. Not as a company in general, obviously, but as a lens maker. There are a number of lenses sold under first party brands that are actually made/designed in part by Tamron.
Indeed. One of the reasons i try not to be focused on any particular brand. There is so much good stuff from many manufacturers now. I mean just look at the 150-600. Being able to buy a decent quality 600mm lens for 1000 bucks is just so awesome. Not to mention samyang and laowa. So much opportunity for us poor folk :) The rest of the gear seems to follow the same trend. Youngnuo seems to be doing awesome things with lighting. I have some of their flashes and i`m very very happy. They seem to be just as good as Nikon at a fraction of the cost and the radio triggers are actually easier to use! So instead of buying one NIkon flash i bought 4 Yonguo so i can go crazy with lights :) Good times!
Dustin would the Sigma or Tamron 100-400 be to heavy for my D7200 mount to keep hanging from the neck strap?
I don’t think so. They are moderately heavy, but not excessively so.
I have watched lots of your videos. And I love listening to your voice and the way you deliver every word. You can be a fantastic narrator. Anyway I am thinking of a newer lens and leaning toward the canon mark II of this very same FL but now I am leaning towards Sigma after watching your excellent review. I am now just going to wait foe your AF test and comparison with the Canon (AF test) and I will based my decision after that. I currently owned 500mm but would like to add a handholdable lens. Thank you for this review Dustin. It is nice to know you are a pastor. God bless and more power to you.
That's very cool feedback. Thank you!
a nother thing difference you cant configure a canon lense sigma no problems i have a 150-600 sigma and no problems think lot of people dont think about these things ?
I would suggest that,you get the dock and put it in dynamic of mode on customized selection.... is world's better then other modes particularly for birding.the dock,works beauifully.
I do have the dock and did tweak functionality. I didn't personally see a big difference.
I have seen many of your videos lately, Dustin, and they are very informative. Another great comparison here. I'd like your opinion on something. I have the Canon EF 100-400 Mark I and thinking of selling it and getting the Sigma 100-400. What I don't specifically like about the Canon is the push-pull zoom (sometimes you have to move your body to zoom in/ out) and the fact that the image stabilization isn't really the newest and most effective. Another thing is that the image quality isn't particularly mind-blowing. Do you think changing to the Sigma would give me better results in IQ and overall performance?
I think that this lens compares very favorably to the Mark 1 lens and that you would be happy with it
Well that was fast! I think I'll be giving it a try. Thank you and well done for your reviews!
So Amazing !! very informative. Sir, That's a great review indeed. What do you think if I use it on a small camera like Canon EOS M50 MK ii with an EF - M adapter?
I haven't tested that combination. It should work, but I don't know how responsive the focus will be.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you very much Sir!
May I know what camera are you using? Thanks
I think I would have been using a Canon EOS 5D Mark IV for this.
Dustin Abbott thanks, Nice review, image quality is there, I also own the Canon, it's pretty much perfect in everyway, so nice performance here. But just to say, I have never got as far as actually buying a Sigma because there is one thing that has always let me down and that is autofocus speed and consistency, Canon spend millions on R&D in this department whereas it would seem that for Sigma, it's secondary. A sharp lens is worthless if it can't catch a sharp shot, lots of us use this focal length for birds and sports, so I'll look forward to your next review here..I think that this is where the Sigma will fall apart as usual. Cheers
+justin holding I agree with your general observations. Check back next week
i want to konw sigma 100- 4000 is this sharper on full focal length and which teleconverter is best for this les plz let me konw thanks sir
I'm not entirely sure of your question regarding sharpness. Sigma would recommend you use their TC if you don't already own another.
What would you recommend, this or the nikon 200-500
+muhammed aboo I'm not a Nikon shooter, so I can't comment on the 200-500
The more I use my Sigma, the more I like it. The latest firmware's have improved auto focus and the one 3 days ago greatly improved the OS. A very good lens getting better with firmware updates!
That's awesome to hear. I really like when lensmakers continue to improve their products via firmware. You feel like they care.
do you need the USB dock to update the firmware?
@@deeber35 Yes you do
I have bought this lens today! This lens is so new that most shops in the Netherlands only have a preorder possibility. One shop however did already have it in stock, took a little travelling, but hé. I put the lens on my camera in the shop and my first impression was how snappy the lens focused. I told that to the guy who sold me the lens and he said, yes. But...the tracking focus is not that great. Not that important for my way of photography, maybe the update firmware will fix it a little. The lens feels nice. yes the guy said, but no tripod collar. I told him to watch Dustin Abbot on youtube! But I am overjoyed with this nice lens. He also said this lens is quit a bargain, in comparison with the Canon 100-400mm. Took some quick test shots on my 6D and they are incredible. I also bought the USB dock, so I will playing like a child this evening :)
He's right about the tracking, which really isn't nearly as good as the Canon, but the lens is really excellent for the money.
The Canon seems out of focus and NOT calibrated. Did u use PDAF & Manual AF using LCD and high magnification? Without such - this comparison is faulted. I really DO hope Sigma performs as such but pls confirm how you do the test.
I used Contrast AF (Live View) magnified 10x, mirror lockup, 2 second delay for all shots.
My Canon is well calibrated, but that is not a factor when using Contrast AF.
OK - then you really have a great Sigma 100-400. Well done:)
Sigma has the advantage of USB dock tuning. Sharpness on the 150-600c after calibration is almost like a prime at 400-500mm. Great if you stick to one body. Downside is slower aperture on the Sigma, so auto ISO tends to be pushed in average light conditions. Been using a second hand 100-400mm canon mki and find shooting still subjects at around 1/40 with the extra aperture and IS a joy to use. So far a great walkabout lens imo. But for super sharp shots that you can add an artistic edge its still Sigma for me, as long as the conditions are right. Not used the 100-400 Sigma but can imagine that with a body specific USB calibration, the sharpness might have a slight edge over the Canon. Canon still wins on aperture. Hoping they bring out an f4 150-500 or 600 in future. That would be a game changer.
@@DustinAbbottTWI should have manual focused. You can see the sharpness of each lens is equal to eachother, on opposite sides of the images.
Hey Dustin i know this video is 6 years old😅 but I'm shooting on an R7 and looking to get a 100-400. Is this sigma lens much better than the newer, yet slower rf 100-400 f5.6-8
Ps I've found both used for about 500usd
Unfortunately I've never tested the Sigma adapted. On paper it would seem like a solid alternative, but I don't know how it will focus after adapting or if there are any quirks that emerge during the process. Maybe you'll get lucky enough that someone who had tested the combo can chime in, but as it is an older video, your chances are slimmer./
Thx well done
You're welcome.
Can anyone confirm how good is the focusing of this lens adapted on Sony via the MC-11 adapter? Thanks folks!
MrPaulicka slow and sometimes hard to focus. I use it on sony a6300 with sigma mc -11 and canon 70d. It's faster on the canon
That's rather disappointing :-/ Thanks for sharing your experience!
Others have commented on this already, but surely the Canon must have missed focus here and there; if the difference in sharpness (especially noticeable on the white window frames) is really as huge as in this comparison, the Canon would simply be a lousy lens, which I find very hard to believe, considering the many good reviews it has had.
It's been quite a while since I've had a look at the lens, so I can't really comment.
How well does the Sigma fair with a 1.4x extender?
I don't have a Sigma extender on hand, but I wouldn't expect too much. This lens has a very slow maximum aperture across its frame and seems to prefer having good light for focus.
Can't wait to see your follow up review on the focus. I loved the Canon 1-4mk2 when I loaned it from CPS but man oh man, $800 means I could afford it sooner. Will you be trying it on APS-C bodies too? I'd be using it on a 7d2
I do intend to cover it on an 80D, which I own.
How would it perform on a canon crop body ?
I've still got to test that.
looking forward to that ;)
Sigma makes good products but man thats a daylight lens at those speeds
Would love to see a canon 70-200 2.8 L and doubler in the mix but wow thank uuu
It definitely needs a lot of light, but do remember that the 70-200L with a 2.0x has a maximum aperture of f/5.6 - only one third of a stop brighter. That's not much of an advantage, and a 2.0x extender will introduce other optical and AF flaws.
yep, thats is why, the slower 2.8 with doubler to me, would be apples to apples for brightness or speed..what is the correct term, " light transmission" ? so, I like the 70-200 2.8 in its various os sforms for clearity, and I own sigma lenses zooms and have not found they stack up as a rule in the extended ranges.. BUT this lens you show does and it comes in canon and Nikon... hummm great pricing new which will only get better over time as well... Can I use it Manual only and forgo the AF etc? Im a manual shooting junkie! ???.
+Matthew White The MF ring isn't bad, though it's far from Zeiss quality.
Very impressive
It really is.
HI Dustin, i dont suspect the excellent IQ of the Sigma, i owned an excellent copy of the 150-600 but i now have the magnificent Canon 100-400 II , as soon as i started looking at your pics i went to check mines because i dont recall being not even a little softer at almost any focal lenght and aperture, just took a look to a 100mm f/4.5 image and its as sharp as it can get, im using a Sony a7r2 (42mp) , have you compared your canon with another copy? i can send you some of my images for reference if you are interested,and nice review as always! thanks
+Pocho Sublow I've tested my copy against a lot of other lenses and it has always performed exceptionally. This copy of the Sigma I am reviewing is just very, very sharp.
আসিতেছে বাংলার স্থানীয় এক নতুন অন্য এক জগত্
My Canon 6D needs a telephoto lens. Will this be o.k.?
Yes, although the Tamron equivalent has better autofocus.
Please do review comparation between 100-400 and the 150-600 and both are sigma C its quite important because other review shows canon L 100-400 ii usm has better image quality even in full 400mm(canon) vs 600mm(sigma) ... so if this sigma 400mm vs can equally even some part better than the canon 400mm is usm then it means its surpass its bigger brother the 600mm C one.. because im looking for a long zoom but with good quality of image, and if the 600 sigma C turns to be as good as well the 400 sigma C then the review that i saw back then was wrong... but if its true that the 400mm is also better then the 600 C version than im positif buying it after i see your honest review :)
Thanks its really important for me if you consider this request im very thankfull!!
+Daniel Kungana Hi Daniel, I'm sorry, but my review schedule is really full, so I probably won't be able to go back and do something like this.
Dustin Abbott well then i can only rely upon to this review only then... as long as this review is honest and correct than it is a simple logic that it is the 400mm sigma is better than the 600mm sigma... well thanks anyway for your review :)
was the canon IS switched on while it was on the tripod?
+Sean Samwell Yes
Dustin Abbott doesn't it reduce the quality of the image if the IS is enabled on the tripod? Because the sigma has no IS correct?
Sean, the Sigma has image stabilisation (OS) too. It's debatable whether or not IS/OS ought to be switched off for tripod use - I think it depends on the shutter speed in operation. But I believe that Canon image stabilisation has built-in tripod detection. However, I wish I could use the Sigma comfortably on a tripod, because it doesn't have its own tripod collar, which is doubly problematic when adapting this lens with the Sigma MC-11 mount adapter for use on a Sony body.
Ian Wilkinson thank you so much this info helps.
I'm sorry, I read that it was switched OFF in your post and responded yes. I always turn the Image Stabilization off on lenses when tripod mounting them - even if they say they detect for tripod. I did the same for the Sigma, which does have image stabilization (OS), too.
How well does this lens work on a 5D MKIII ?. I have seen a report of really noticeable Vignetting on background test shots but not in real life outdoor testing.
I don't own a 5D Mark III, but I've used it a lot on a MK IV. Vignette is always there, but is less noticeable in certain situations. My example is a real world example, obviously.
Your captions are in Dutch?
That must be a local setting.
I'm trying to decide between this and the 150-600mm Sigma. I'm an APS-C user and I'm not concerned with the price difference, so the only reasons to go for the smaller one are for the weight. I'd use a tripod when available but I'd really like to use it a lot handheld too. What do you think?
I think on APS-C a 100-400 makes a lot of sense.
Hi Dustin
Great review on the Sigma 100-400. Your sharpness review was on a Canon Mark IV. What would sharpness be like on a 80d, and is the absence of a tripod collar a big problem?
Thanks Daryl
I intend to cover the lens on an 80D after I wrap up full frame coverage. Whether or not the lack of a tripod collar is a big deal will depend on how you use a lens like this.
Sounds like a winner again from Sigma.
It has really exceeded my expectations.
No night shots?
Neither of these are really "night" lenses.
Anyone own the Sigma and shot with a Canon 100-400mm? How about the Canon 400mm?
Sigma lenses rock!
This one is a surprisingly complete lens. It has some flaws, but not any that I consider fatal.
Does it work well with the EOS R? Can you get sharp images at 1/250th consistently with the OS at the long end?
I’ve not tested that exact combination. The OS shouldn’t really work any better or worse with the EOS R, however, as it is built into the lens.
Sigma are killing it lately. This is exciting.
+theizza68 It's an interesting lens, for sure.
适马边沿画质好于佳能，中心锐度佳能好于适马。但价格来说，还是适马性价比更高一些。
what did you said?
Hi,Mr. Abbott I follow all your vids I like your work a lot .... but on this time I differ of you a hair ... mainly this lens is for action and bird photography its king , if you prove this sigma lens its way better taking a fast bird , and its sharper then canon I pack back my canon and get the sigma... thanks cuz I have the experience with the 150-600 g2 tam and that's what happened tamy its very sharp but ones u try to bit canon naaa no way ( I did perform calibration , etc on the tamy firmware you name it thanks
+jim velasco I don't think you are differing from me. I have not said this lens is better for birding; I just showed how sharp it was. Autofocus is very important for wildlife and birding, and I'll cover that in my final episode.
Canon are screwing us blind these days particularly in the UK. It's good to see Tamron and Sigma are moving up from the budget market into the quality sector at a price point around where the previous models of L series were. I'm not a 3rd party buyer but I'm watching very closely and if these offerings are on a par with the main brand I could be up for it.
I hope Canon are reading this. Their ex customers are here.
I suspect there are some real market pressures coming from Tamron and Sigma. Their recent offerings have been too good to ignore.
I'd love to have the Canon 100 - 400 lens, but, as a hobbyist, it's way way out of my price range.
Not surprising. It's a pricy lens.