I got the version for Sony E and managed to take a much wanted photo of a kingfisher within the first month owning it. I really like the performance of the lens in terms of image quality and autofocus but would love to see a teleconverter for Sony as well, since the extra reach would be helpful in some special occasions
I recently purchased the sigma 100-400 sony version and so far i am impressed with the optical quality, size and weight, and the discrete look of the lens. I did intend to get the Sony 200-600 but weight and flashy appearance made the Sigma much more attractive, to say nothing of the price.
I sold my Sony 70-200F4 for this lens and I am really enjoying it. I will echo the review's comments about sharpness....it is very sharp! I think the build quality is very good and think that for many people this is a more realistic alternative to the Sony 100-400 because of the very attractive price. I am primarily a landscape photographer using an A7RIII.
Love your input on this lens. I've used a few sigma lenses over the years with my Nikon D810 & D750. I moved over to the Sony A7riii & Sony A7ii last year and I've been thinking of getting this Sigma 100-400mm for a few weeks now. So this video has definitely made my mind up. Thank you for taking the time and effort to give us a view on this amazing Lens. All the best from the UK. Stay safe 👍👍👍👍
I bought the 100-400 for my S5 yesterday based partly on this video. I was thinking about waiting for the Panasonic 70-300, but decided I wanted the extra reach, and might even get a teleconverter in the future. Thanks for the review!
I have a sony aps-c body and was weighing using this on the crop sensor, or getting the sony 70-350. I ultimately went with the sony because of its physical size, but the sigma did give great images on that sensor and was built well. Been contemplating upgrading to the a7c (portability is my biggest factor) and if I did, this sigma would be at the top of the list. Thanks for sharing your experiences with it, it's helpful!
I use the sigma 100-400 dg dn with the lumix S5. I am very happy with this lens. The photos are very sharp for a very small size and weight. It's great for birds photography but also for landscape photography.
Now that the Lumix 70-300 is out, I'd love to see your thoughts. I'm a Lumix S5 user and I'm really torn between the 70-300 and the Sigma 100-400. I think the Lumix lens will be better with autofocus and image stabilization but there are no teleconverters for it. I like to shoot birds, nature, and landscapes, as well as product photography for print.
I just bought this lens for my Sony a7Riii and so far, I love it! I also have a Sigma 14-24 2.8 DG DN which is a fantastic ultra-wide lens. Nice video, look forward to the next one.
I am using the Sigma 100 - 400 mm lens on my old Canon Rebel T61 and I absolutely love it, I do mostly bird photography right now with it and just order a 1.4 teleconverter. I am hoping to not lose tooooo much light we shall see and hoping to still be able to use AF such a newbie here.
Great review of the 100-400. I don’;t have.a telephoto. I use mostly own primes with a Lumix S5. I own a 24 mm, 45 mm, both Sigma lenses and they’re lovely. I wanted a telephoto that I could use in landscape and outdoor sports, and this one appears to be affordable. I am in the process of acquiring it. Thanks for the review. It may be a shock to me when it finally arrives because most of what I own is very small.
Years ago, I had a 300 mm f4 that I really loved. I sold it and I've never found a replacement that I liked. I don't think I'd ever need 600 and the prices are jaw dropping anyway.
Love to see a comparison between the 70-350mm Sony OSS and the 100-400mm Sigma on Sony APSC camera bodies... Realize that there are major differences at both ends of the focal range and of course weight and size are a difference... My question is about IQ differences between these two lenses at equivalent focal lengths...
looks a very good option for the L-mount , I'm coming from Lumix M43 where I use the Lumix 100-300mm, full frame equivalent 200-600 mm. and have taken some nice wild life images with that.
I have the Sigma 100-400 DG OS HSM and I use it very often with my Nikon D7500. After some reasonable tests I think it is very good lens for its price. Yes, it is not very fast when it comes about its aperture but I did some great photos with shutter speed at 1/2000s with ISO lower than 300 in not very good daylight conditions.
@@BrianZuma The best way to get good photos of birds is that photographer must be shy and hidden from the birds eye. I can say that SIGMA 100-400 was my best buy in the last year. It is sharp and the colors are very good. I highly recommend this lens.
This was very helpful in understanding where my set up will be challenged vs it's just my lack of ability currently. Like you, I am very conscientious about interfering wildlife with my proximity. I knew a 200-600 would be ideal, but also was seeking lighter more mobile set up than I had been using. I use a Sony a7riii and the Sigma 100-400. Sounds like on those 400mm shots of elk, I might try f/8 vs f/6.3 to get a sharper cropped image? Sometimes elk offer closer range. If I wanted to stay say 300mm on my lense, about how many yards away are we talking to still allow cropping on a 42mp mirrorless body? Also, any word on an e-mount teleconverter?
This lens might be for me! I use a Sony a7iii and shoot motocross/action sports. About 70% video but photos are also important for my projects. The only thing I’m a bit hesitant about is low light, some of the events take place at night in open air stadiums or indoor. Like you mentioned there are so many options but the price point might be key for me at this stage in my career. Thanks for the review!
This is the first video from you that I've seen and it was super good! I will definitely be coming back to this channel. Also, I saw the peaks, do you live in Flagstaff too? 😂
I recently got the Sony E mount version of this lens for my A7R3 (having previously owned the Canon version using a MC11 adaptor which also worked quite well and was very sharp). It's super sharp and with the resolution of the A7R3 and its good high ISO performance, I have found even when cropping in significantly, that the images are still great. Whilst I would like a 200-600 (also) for sure, the 100-400's portability for travel and hiking etc makes it so practical, and at that cost it's hard to beat. I think I read somewhere that there wont be an E mount teleconverter coming (?) - if so for birds at a distance maybe I'll get a A6400 as an alternative! Thanks for the review.
At sometime in the near future I will be buying the L mount Sigma 100-400mm lens and 2x converter based on your review. I don’t think there is another review like it for these products.
im ashamed to say i use a nikon 180-400 f4 e with built in 1.4 converter , NO MORE CRUD IN MY MIRROR BOX but i love the videos so keep up the great work .,
You do a great job of explaining and offering different points of view. I am interested in the 100-400 Sigma lens, and I have an S5, so with the stabilization both in the camera and in the lens, hand holding this lens at slower shutter speeds is an advantage, or am I correct in saying that?
Very good video. Concerning the inevitable noise when the sensitivity is increased, one can obtain much more effective corrections with software such as DxO PhotoLab than with LR.
Thanks for a very good presentation and analysis. I have a Sony 200-600 with A7RIII. Ím thinking to get this lens - it´s not so heavy and I can take it with me at any time. But i must say 200-600 is extremely sharp and crispy. So it will be a complement.
I own primarily Nikon gear and formerly a 600 f.4 and 300 f2.8--but now a 300 f4, 80-400 and a 200-500--I just bought a Leica CL to cut down the weight and I am looking for a replacement for the Nikon1 80-300 mm- a very compact lens--maybe this Sigma is it--but I agree--the cost has to be cut somehow--perhaps the plastic barrel.
Thanks for a great review! The Sony 100-400 GM's image quality may me about this [--] much better than the Sigma but the difference isn't significant enough to warrant paying this [---------] much more $$. I'm happy you touched on landscape and environmental work which is where I believe the 100-400 focal length really shines.
Hello, I'll try to write something about your video here with the translator. I have the Panasonic S5, had the 150-600mm for 24 hours, very heavy, unwieldy, and now and then to get something closer, no Thanks, I gave it back. I still have the Sony RX10M4 (can also go up to 600mm in kb) but it's a different quality, I'm considering buying the 100-400mm from Sigma, lighter, more handy, if necessary I would also have the converter TC-2011, which I've had for a few days, with the 150-600mm the converter eats up a lot of light, but I kept the converter because it also fits the Sigma 105mm macro😉. I think the quality is still very good with 800mm, with sunny weather no problem with the aperture, I think?! I'll probably buy the 100-400mm from Sigma, the Panasonic one isn't better either, as you said, other brands are simply more expensive, but not always better. Thanks for yours Enlightenment! Stay healthy and greetings from Germany.
I love my sony 70-350mm but there is no teleconverter which is really annoying. Would be fantastic for travelling. Love my sony 200-600mm but boy is it bulky. The sony 100-400 is so expensive so I think I'll go for the sigma when they introduce a teleconverter. Hope they do it soon.
I just got this lens for the Sony E mount and have been loving it. I crop quite a bit, but I have mostly been using it on the California coastline with pretty good light. Noise, for me, have not been too much of a problem. My only very minor complaint was the price of the lens collar comparatively to the price of the lens. Overall, I am very happy with the lens.
Have you tried super 35 x1.5 and clearzoom x2 with jpeg only combined. It should give 1200mm theoretical. I tried on my 17-28 and was able to get 84mm with good quality jpeg on my Sony a7c
Nice video, thanks. If they brought out a sport version f4.5-5.6 I would be interested, having until recently owned the Canon 100-400ii. But I have now invested heavily in the SL2 and 90-280, so I will content myself with environmental wildlife photography rather than "filling the frame". As you say, cropability with the SL2 is very useful and the max f4 aperture is worth the loss of reach for me. And no prospect of Leica producing a teleconverter for the 90-280 either.
It would be nice for sigma to make a dg dn 300 f4 like on my Nikon. I notice they do have a 500mm but it’s significantly more costly…. The Nikon f lens you can get for very little, you just crop 3x and you don’t lose any sharpness.
Question. I own the Tamron 70-180 2.8, but I would like something with a little more reach. Should I get the Sigma 100-400, or would the teleconverter do the trick? I'm guessing that at 180mm at 2.8, the teleconverter would put it at 360mm at 5.6. In theory that would mean I'm letting in more light than the Sigma at 400mm f6.3.
I don't know if your Leica SL2 has the same type of thing as my Lumix S1 where you can reduce the size of the jpegs (Large 24mp, Medium 12mp, Small 6mp) and it has an inbuilt teleconverter (x1.4 on Medium and x2 on Small) which keeps the original f-stop, but the raw images stay at the full original size. I hope I've explained that sensibly
Thanks for a great review. I'm thinking of buying a telephoto for my Alpha but really don't want to pay Sony price. I previously used Tamron with a Canon DSLR but I'm persuaded to buy the Sigma which has an extra 100mm advantage even though a little more expensive - but still, both options are much cheaper than Sony
I bought the new tamron 70-300 with the sony a7c and i am very happy with the photos. It is really a great lens. We have a big smile each time we take some photo with it. Like the 17-28, tamron create really good lens for sony. The stabilization ibis work great in photo and video. The sigma has maybe an even better quality, i don’t know but certainly has longer focal range. However it is more heavy than the tamron which is not more heavier than my 17-28. You can nearly shoot with one hand. I get 450mm in super 35 mode with it and 900mm with clearzoom.
GREAT review; new subscriber as a result. To answer your question at 14:10, I’m a hiker/volunteer patroller who is getting into landscape and wildlife photography so this lens with my a6000 fits the bill. I also have a Sony 55-200 lens. Wondering what kind of bag/holster makes the most sense if I want to hike along and take out the camera/lens quickly (without taking off my pack).
I would like to try this lens, have owned GM before6, but sold it, because of bad OSS, comparing it to Nikkors 200-500 VR, OSS on GM is not something good. On the other side, VR is excellent.
Have you tried super 35 mode on sony a7c and clearzoom set to x2 ? I bought the 70-300 tamron and i can go to 900mm with super 35 + clearzoom in jpeg 10MP mode and it is very good with the a7c. It is still nearly as good as the fuLl size sensor 12 mp of an a7siii which cost double the price.
So, thanks for this review but: what do you mean this could be: i use the 100-400 on my S1R. If i shoot with this combination on a tripod (and belive me, it´s ver well positioned!!) i often got real blury pictures. So i am looking to find the failure. On the sturdy tripod, with 10 sec. delay . . . nothing helps. Exapt the High Pixel Mode. There the pictures are sharp. So, i think, it´s something with the OS. Do you know how to switch off correctly? (S1r has an body and lens stabalisation). Or do you have any other ideas for my problem) Thks al lot Klaus
Good review, thanks ! I've currently got the Sony 24-105mm and am considering picking up this one. Sounds like it has the reach/quality/price triumvirate I am looking for ! As for teleconvertors, I'm happy jumping into APSC mode on my A7Riv to get that extra oomph :-) Cheers !
Yes super 35 works great, i can go to 900mm with clearzoom with my tamron 70-300 and the a7c. The pictures are great. In theory we can even add the digital zoom to double that up to 1800mm but i never use the digital zoom.
Don't think I will be running out paying over $10,000 Canadian for a SL2 ! Guess I'II just stay with my Nikon D500 with zooms 17-55 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 and 200-500 f 5.6 and a few other primes :-)
I bought this lens this fall, for my Sony A7riii. I’m thinking of buying an APSC CAMERA (a6000) instead of outlaying for the more expensive Sony teleconverter..! 🤔
Do you use a telephoto lens for wildlife in bright sunlight? Maybe in a zoo. In my case the animals appear in the morning or evening when the light is not good.
Bought the Nikon F-mount to use with my D-850. It is the only piece of equipment that I've sent back...... Really bad. By the way, I love my Sigma Art 14-24 f 2.8.
a little underwhelmed after initial time with the lens aboard my Lumix S5🤔 finding the auto focus a little hit n miss and gets itself confused somewhat! coming from my m43 100-300mm with Lumix G80 which was excellent in most situations🙄
Hi, I just got this lens a week ago and I am noticing that the autofocus when shooting in video mode is veeeery slow compared when shooting photos. I mainly do videos and this seems to be an issue for me. I tried it both on my a7iii and a6600 and had the same experience. Have you had similar issues? I also haven't updated the firmware of the lens from 1.0 to 2.0 since I have to ship the lens for that. Thanks!
If I had either a Leica or Sony, the 100-400 would be ideal. You could hand hold that relatively easily as it's not so big. But, the 200-600mm Sony lens, that would be a definite tripod and gimbal job!!! The 600mm f/4 would need a crane!!! :D :P I do wish, though, that Sigma would make the new 100-400 for other cameras, too. If they did, I would be very interested in buying one.
Ive read it is a contractual limitation that an e mount sigma TC doesnt exist. Sony dont want competitors cannibalising their high end lens sales. some smart cookie could make the L mount TC work though.
@@godsinbox fuck that sony they're telephoto lenses is terribly expensive i have 2 sony lenses but they are not telephoto and price was terrible but ok that lenses is very very good and pay 2 times more for telephoto lens no thanks im not so crazy
A lot of Sigma lenses are even better than Leica lenses for less money. Not just better for the money, just better. I have two Leica lenses. It's more of an appreciation of smaller scale production than an actual better lens for me.
Hey, how have people found the stabilisation? If I'm a bit quick in taking the shot I can end up with some blurring, even with a steady hand. If I wait a second it's fine. Does anyone also experience this? The manual says stabilisation can take up to a second to settle but just wanted to know people's real world experiences! Thanks
Question, does turning on the len’s OS turn off the in body stabilization that you’d find in a a7iii? It’s incredible that photo was 400mm 1/320th at f/8 and that low of an ISO.
instagram.com/p/CFm2pKPh9TQ/?igshid=1pmxe0r4g89el this is with a manual focus 300mm f4 lens. 400mm would be perfect reach and autofocus would up my keeper rate.
Sorry :) but you are wrong about teleconverters "simply because there are more glass", no, no and no, many modern lenses have lots of glass (most are plastic elements!), it is because you the teleconverters magnifies the lenses to longer focal lenghts and the lenses still have the same front size element and therefor the aperture becomes less sensite. You have to read some more tecnical about lenses ;) I was tempted with the Sony 200-600mm, but I prefer primes and I hope that we soon will see compact primes of 300mm (4.0, 4.5 and 5.6), 400mm (4.5 and 5.6) and 500mm 5.6. The Sony 200-600 are too big and heavy to carry long hikes.
That lens is basically a no brainer given it's performance and price. But since you already have the SL2 and Nikon optics you might want to consider this: www.novoflex.de/en/products-637/lens-adapters//adapterfinder-products/adapter-nikon-objektive-an-leica-t-sl-gehaeuse.3642.html?rgerg=38
I got the version for Sony E and managed to take a much wanted photo of a kingfisher within the first month owning it. I really like the performance of the lens in terms of image quality and autofocus but would love to see a teleconverter for Sony as well, since the extra reach would be helpful in some special occasions
Nice to hear it's working out for you. I've been on the fence with this lens. I think it would be nice for some local wildlife pictures I want to do.
I recently purchased the sigma 100-400 sony version and so far i am impressed with the optical quality, size and weight, and the discrete look of the lens. I did intend to get the Sony 200-600 but weight and flashy appearance made the Sigma much more attractive, to say nothing of the price.
I sold my Sony 70-200F4 for this lens and I am really enjoying it. I will echo the review's comments about sharpness....it is very sharp! I think the build quality is very good and think that for many people this is a more realistic alternative to the Sony 100-400 because of the very attractive price. I am primarily a landscape photographer using an A7RIII.
Love your input on this lens. I've used a few sigma lenses over the years with my Nikon D810 & D750. I moved over to the Sony A7riii & Sony A7ii last year and I've been thinking of getting this Sigma 100-400mm for a few weeks now. So this video has definitely made my mind up. Thank you for taking the time and effort to give us a view on this amazing Lens. All the best from the UK. Stay safe 👍👍👍👍
Did you get a chance to compare the Sigma 100-400 to the Lumix 70-300 for L mount ? Trying to decide between the two.
I bought the 100-400 for my S5 yesterday based partly on this video. I was thinking about waiting for the Panasonic 70-300, but decided I wanted the extra reach, and might even get a teleconverter in the future. Thanks for the review!
How is that going? Any changes to your opinion after use?
I have a sony aps-c body and was weighing using this on the crop sensor, or getting the sony 70-350. I ultimately went with the sony because of its physical size, but the sigma did give great images on that sensor and was built well. Been contemplating upgrading to the a7c (portability is my biggest factor) and if I did, this sigma would be at the top of the list. Thanks for sharing your experiences with it, it's helpful!
I use the sigma 100-400 dg dn with the lumix S5. I am very happy with this lens. The photos are very sharp for a very small size and weight. It's great for birds photography but also for landscape photography.
how about the IOS I think it's mediocre compared to Lumix lenses...
Now that the Lumix 70-300 is out, I'd love to see your thoughts. I'm a Lumix S5 user and I'm really torn between the 70-300 and the Sigma 100-400. I think the Lumix lens will be better with autofocus and image stabilization but there are no teleconverters for it. I like to shoot birds, nature, and landscapes, as well as product photography for print.
I just bought this lens for my Sony a7Riii and so far, I love it! I also have a Sigma 14-24 2.8 DG DN which is a fantastic ultra-wide lens. Nice video, look forward to the next one.
I am using the Sigma 100 - 400 mm lens on my old Canon Rebel T61 and I absolutely love it, I do mostly bird photography right now with it and just order a 1.4 teleconverter. I am hoping to not lose tooooo much light we shall see and hoping to still be able to use AF such a newbie here.
Great review of the 100-400. I don’;t have.a telephoto. I use mostly own primes with a Lumix S5. I own a 24 mm, 45 mm, both Sigma lenses and they’re lovely. I wanted a telephoto that I could use in landscape and outdoor sports, and this one appears to be affordable. I am in the process of acquiring it. Thanks for the review. It may be a shock to me when it finally arrives because most of what I own is very small.
Years ago, I had a 300 mm f4 that I really loved. I sold it and I've never found a replacement that I liked. I don't think I'd ever need 600 and the prices are jaw dropping anyway.
Primes are my favorite but zooms are so useful!
Love to see a comparison between the 70-350mm Sony OSS and the 100-400mm Sigma on Sony APSC camera bodies... Realize that there are major differences at both ends of the focal range and of course weight and size are a difference... My question is about IQ differences between these two lenses at equivalent focal lengths...
looks a very good option for the L-mount , I'm coming from Lumix M43 where I use the Lumix 100-300mm, full frame equivalent 200-600 mm. and have taken some nice wild life images with that.
I have the Sigma 100-400 DG OS HSM and I use it very often with my Nikon D7500. After some reasonable tests I think it is very good lens for its price. Yes, it is not very fast when it comes about its aperture but I did some great photos with shutter speed at 1/2000s with ISO lower than 300 in not very good daylight conditions.
I’m planing on getting that lens for ef seems best thing without overspending prolly a f4 all the way would be all anyone would need
@@BrianZuma The best way to get good photos of birds is that photographer must be shy and hidden from the birds eye. I can say that SIGMA 100-400 was my best buy in the last year. It is sharp and the colors are very good. I highly recommend this lens.
This was very helpful in understanding where my set up will be challenged vs it's just my lack of ability currently. Like you, I am very conscientious about interfering wildlife with my proximity. I knew a 200-600 would be ideal, but also was seeking lighter more mobile set up than I had been using. I use a Sony a7riii and the Sigma 100-400. Sounds like on those 400mm shots of elk, I might try f/8 vs f/6.3 to get a sharper cropped image? Sometimes elk offer closer range. If I wanted to stay say 300mm on my lense, about how many yards away are we talking to still allow cropping on a 42mp mirrorless body? Also, any word on an e-mount teleconverter?
Sigma have produced many excelling TP lenses over the years. It's definitely a brand I trust. But you're right about the limitations.
This lens might be for me! I use a Sony a7iii and shoot motocross/action sports. About 70% video but photos are also important for my projects. The only thing I’m a bit hesitant about is low light, some of the events take place at night in open air stadiums or indoor.
Like you mentioned there are so many options but the price point might be key for me at this stage in my career. Thanks for the review!
This is the first video from you that I've seen and it was super good! I will definitely be coming back to this channel. Also, I saw the peaks, do you live in Flagstaff too? 😂
I recently got the Sony E mount version of this lens for my A7R3 (having previously owned the Canon version using a MC11 adaptor which also worked quite well and was very sharp). It's super sharp and with the resolution of the A7R3 and its good high ISO performance, I have found even when cropping in significantly, that the images are still great. Whilst I would like a 200-600 (also) for sure, the 100-400's portability for travel and hiking etc makes it so practical, and at that cost it's hard to beat. I think I read somewhere that there wont be an E mount teleconverter coming (?) - if so for birds at a distance maybe I'll get a A6400 as an alternative! Thanks for the review.
Hi, and then you opted for the a6400 with the sigma 100-400mm??
@@giuliannomoroni7860 yes, I picked up a used A6400 for a good price. Better focusing for tracking.
@@marklawson3141 Good, and which sigma are you using, 100-400mm dg dn, or sigma 150-600mm + MC-11 adapter ??
The 100-400 dg dn
@@marklawson3141 Did you get a teleconverter for this combination?
At sometime in the near future I will be buying the L mount Sigma 100-400mm lens and 2x converter based on your review. I don’t think there is another review like it for these products.
im ashamed to say i use a nikon 180-400 f4 e with built in 1.4 converter , NO MORE CRUD IN MY MIRROR BOX but i love the videos so keep up the great work .,
It opens up so much more cost effective range for Leica SL2 users
Agreed!
You do a great job of explaining and offering different points of view. I am interested in the 100-400 Sigma lens, and I have an S5, so with the stabilization both in the camera and in the lens, hand holding this lens at slower shutter speeds is an advantage, or am I correct in saying that?
If I upgrade to full frame this lens is very interesting. Sony's 100-400 is so expensive. Today I have the 70-350 for APS-C.
Thank you for the video. How does it perform with the A7RIV?
Very good video. Concerning the inevitable noise when the sensitivity is increased, one can obtain much more effective corrections with software such as DxO PhotoLab than with LR.
This seem to bo the perfect choice for the panasonic s5.
Thanks for a very good presentation and analysis. I have a Sony 200-600 with A7RIII. Ím thinking to get this lens - it´s not so heavy and I can take it with me at any time. But i must say 200-600 is extremely sharp and crispy. So it will be a complement.
7:18 The speed of the autofocus also depends on the speed of the motor in the lens, which is fine btw.
I own primarily Nikon gear and formerly a 600 f.4 and 300 f2.8--but now a 300 f4, 80-400 and a 200-500--I just bought a Leica CL to cut down the weight and I am looking for a replacement for the Nikon1 80-300 mm- a very compact lens--maybe this Sigma is it--but I agree--the cost has to be cut somehow--perhaps the plastic barrel.
How about using it on aps-c mode from the camera feature instead of a teleconverter . What would be the difference in image quality ?
Thanks for a great review! The Sony 100-400 GM's image quality may me about this [--] much better than the Sigma but the difference isn't significant enough to warrant paying this [---------] much more $$. I'm happy you touched on landscape and environmental work which is where I believe the 100-400 focal length really shines.
I am thinking of getting Sigma 100-400 or Sony 200-600 with A7 and does Altas ATHLETE fit Sony 200-600?
Hello, I'll try to write something about your video here with the translator. I have the Panasonic S5, had the 150-600mm for 24 hours, very heavy, unwieldy, and now and then to get something closer, no Thanks, I gave it back. I still have the Sony RX10M4 (can also go up to 600mm in kb) but it's a different quality, I'm considering buying the 100-400mm from Sigma, lighter, more handy, if necessary I would also have the converter TC-2011, which I've had for a few days, with the 150-600mm the converter eats up a lot of light, but I kept the converter because it also fits the Sigma 105mm macro😉. I think the quality is still very good with 800mm, with sunny weather no problem with the aperture, I think?! I'll probably buy the 100-400mm from Sigma, the Panasonic one isn't better either, as you said, other brands are simply more expensive, but not always better. Thanks for yours Enlightenment! Stay healthy and greetings from Germany.
I love my sony 70-350mm but there is no teleconverter which is really annoying. Would be fantastic for travelling. Love my sony 200-600mm but boy is it bulky. The sony 100-400 is so expensive so I think I'll go for the sigma when they introduce a teleconverter. Hope they do it soon.
I just got this lens for the Sony E mount and have been loving it. I crop quite a bit, but I have mostly been using it on the California coastline with pretty good light. Noise, for me, have not been too much of a problem. My only very minor complaint was the price of the lens collar comparatively to the price of the lens. Overall, I am very happy with the lens.
Have you tried super 35 x1.5 and clearzoom x2 with jpeg only combined. It should give 1200mm theoretical. I tried on my 17-28 and was able to get 84mm with good quality jpeg on my Sony a7c
Nice video, thanks. If they brought out a sport version f4.5-5.6 I would be interested, having until recently owned the Canon 100-400ii. But I have now invested heavily in the SL2 and 90-280, so I will content myself with environmental wildlife photography rather than "filling the frame". As you say, cropability with the SL2 is very useful and the max f4 aperture is worth the loss of reach for me. And no prospect of Leica producing a teleconverter for the 90-280 either.
It would be nice for sigma to make a dg dn 300 f4 like on my Nikon. I notice they do have a 500mm but it’s significantly more costly…. The Nikon f lens you can get for very little, you just crop 3x and you don’t lose any sharpness.
Really nice review and very good points! Ordered the channel, thank you!
Question. I own the Tamron 70-180 2.8, but I would like something with a little more reach. Should I get the Sigma 100-400, or would the teleconverter do the trick? I'm guessing that at 180mm at 2.8, the teleconverter would put it at 360mm at 5.6. In theory that would mean I'm letting in more light than the Sigma at 400mm f6.3.
First. Your explanations are excellent. Great informational video. Top notch. Thank you.
I'm glad it was helpful. Thanks for watching!
well done! Another really nice review
I don't know if your Leica SL2 has the same type of thing as my Lumix S1 where you can reduce the size of the jpegs (Large 24mp, Medium 12mp, Small 6mp) and it has an inbuilt teleconverter (x1.4 on Medium and x2 on Small) which keeps the original f-stop, but the raw images stay at the full original size. I hope I've explained that sensibly
I’m using canon 100-400mm. It’s a great lens
Thanks for a great review. I'm thinking of buying a telephoto for my Alpha but really don't want to pay Sony price. I previously used Tamron with a Canon DSLR but I'm persuaded to buy the Sigma which has an extra 100mm advantage even though a little more expensive - but still, both options are much cheaper than Sony
I bought the new tamron 70-300 with the sony a7c and i am very happy with the photos. It is really a great lens. We have a big smile each time we take some photo with it. Like the 17-28, tamron create really good lens for sony. The stabilization ibis work great in photo and video. The sigma has maybe an even better quality, i don’t know but certainly has longer focal range. However it is more heavy than the tamron which is not more heavier than my 17-28. You can nearly shoot with one hand. I get 450mm in super 35 mode with it and 900mm with clearzoom.
GREAT review; new subscriber as a result. To answer your question at 14:10, I’m a hiker/volunteer patroller who is getting into landscape and wildlife photography so this lens with my a6000 fits the bill. I also have a Sony 55-200 lens. Wondering what kind of bag/holster makes the most sense if I want to hike along and take out the camera/lens quickly (without taking off my pack).
Definitely one for the SL2 wish list. I wonder how the teleconverters would work with my Leica 24-90?
Right now, the only lens these teleconverters work with is this 100-400. :)
@@LeighAndRaymond what about the sigma 105 macro art lens?
I would like to try this lens, have owned GM before6, but sold it, because of bad OSS, comparing it to Nikkors 200-500 VR, OSS on GM is not something good. On the other side, VR is excellent.
One question, why the tamron 18-400 is shorter than the sigma 100-400.
Shouldnt be bigger the one with more ranch?
Have you tried super 35 mode on sony a7c and clearzoom set to x2 ?
I bought the 70-300 tamron and i can go to 900mm with super 35 + clearzoom in jpeg 10MP mode and it is very good with the a7c. It is still nearly as good as the fuLl size sensor 12 mp of an a7siii which cost double the price.
So, thanks for this review but: what do you mean this could be: i use the 100-400 on my S1R. If i shoot with this combination on a tripod (and belive me, it´s ver well positioned!!) i often got real blury pictures. So i am looking to find the failure. On the sturdy tripod, with 10 sec. delay . . . nothing helps. Exapt the High Pixel Mode. There the pictures are sharp. So, i think, it´s something with the OS. Do you know how to switch off correctly? (S1r has an body and lens stabalisation). Or do you have any other ideas for my problem) Thks al lot Klaus
I have a18-35 3.5-4.5 ,a 24-70 2.8 , a70-200 2.8 and a 200-500 5.6 and these seem to cover almost all the bases, all nikon.
Good review, thanks ! I've currently got the Sony 24-105mm and am considering picking up this one. Sounds like it has the reach/quality/price triumvirate I am looking for ! As for teleconvertors, I'm happy jumping into APSC mode on my A7Riv to get that extra oomph :-) Cheers !
Yes super 35 works great, i can go to 900mm with clearzoom with my tamron 70-300 and the a7c. The pictures are great. In theory we can even add the digital zoom to double that up to 1800mm but i never use the digital zoom.
Don't think I will be running out paying over $10,000 Canadian for a SL2 ! Guess I'II just stay with my Nikon D500 with zooms 17-55 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 and 200-500 f 5.6 and a few other primes :-)
Other than using it on Sony full frame, I love it on the Sony APSC for the extra reach.
I agree, today I would buy this instead og the 70-350 APS-C. But when I bought the 70-350 the Sigma 100-400 didn't exist, not even as a rumor.
I bought this lens this fall, for my Sony A7riii.
I’m thinking of buying an APSC CAMERA (a6000) instead of outlaying for the more expensive Sony teleconverter..! 🤔
@@thebinpustey6497 sony teleconverter wont fit on sigma. only use where it is designated to fit.
I use the 200-500mm f/5.6 nikon.
Do you use a telephoto lens for wildlife in bright sunlight? Maybe in a zoo. In my case the animals appear in the morning or evening when the light is not good.
I do see wildlife in bright sunlight but you're right... they do seem to like the more dim times of day. :)
Will be shooting some sports/running and the huge amount of birds near my home in Colorado with this lens.
Bought the Nikon F-mount to use with my D-850. It is the only piece of equipment that I've sent back...... Really bad. By the way, I love my Sigma Art 14-24 f 2.8.
I really want them to come out with a Fuji X version.
a little underwhelmed after initial time with the lens aboard my Lumix S5🤔 finding the auto focus a little hit n miss and gets itself confused somewhat! coming from my m43 100-300mm with Lumix G80 which was excellent in most situations🙄
Now, seven months later, how does it work with the AF on the S5?
Hi, I just got this lens a week ago and I am noticing that the autofocus when shooting in video mode is veeeery slow compared when shooting photos. I mainly do videos and this seems to be an issue for me. I tried it both on my a7iii and a6600 and had the same experience. Have you had similar issues? I also haven't updated the firmware of the lens from 1.0 to 2.0 since I have to ship the lens for that. Thanks!
If I had either a Leica or Sony, the 100-400 would be ideal. You could hand hold that relatively easily as it's not so big. But, the 200-600mm Sony lens, that would be a definite tripod and gimbal job!!! The 600mm f/4 would need a crane!!! :D :P I do wish, though, that Sigma would make the new 100-400 for other cameras, too. If they did, I would be very interested in buying one.
Canon are supposed to be opening rf mount there already is a Ef version of this lens. I think Nikon has a dslr version too
when will come out this lens converter x2 for sony e mount ???
Ive read it is a contractual limitation that an e mount sigma TC doesnt exist. Sony dont want competitors cannibalising their high end lens sales.
some smart cookie could make the L mount TC work though.
@@godsinbox fuck that sony they're telephoto lenses is terribly expensive i have 2 sony lenses but they are not telephoto and price was terrible but ok that lenses is very very good and pay 2 times more for telephoto lens no thanks im not so crazy
excellent review👍
I can't justify a Leica, so Sony E Sigma at the lower weight is perfect. But why o why, no teleconverter for E mount?
A lot of Sigma lenses are even better than Leica lenses for less money. Not just better for the money, just better. I have two Leica lenses. It's more of an appreciation of smaller scale production than an actual better lens for me.
Sigma said that their agreement with Sony didn't allow it.
Hey, how have people found the stabilisation? If I'm a bit quick in taking the shot I can end up with some blurring, even with a steady hand. If I wait a second it's fine. Does anyone also experience this? The manual says stabilisation can take up to a second to settle but just wanted to know people's real world experiences! Thanks
Question, does turning on the len’s OS turn off the in body stabilization that you’d find in a a7iii? It’s incredible that photo was 400mm 1/320th at f/8 and that low of an ISO.
No, it doesn't turn off the IBIS of the A7III (late to the party 😂)
4:10 nearing the minimum aperture ~ max aperture nr
I soooooo want this for Fuji. Life is not fair.
Fujifilm makes a telephoto that is sold with a tele converter included. However, the set is $10,000. Wow.
@@TexasPelican they have a perfectly good 100-400mm zoom at twice the price of the Sigma
instagram.com/p/CFm2pKPh9TQ/?igshid=1pmxe0r4g89el this is with a manual focus 300mm f4 lens. 400mm would be perfect reach and autofocus would up my keeper rate.
And your wish came true!
Thank you, for another great review.
Glad you enjoyed it :)
Don't tell me what I can and can't obsess about! LOL 😆
Sorry :) but you are wrong about teleconverters "simply because there are more glass", no, no and no, many modern lenses have lots of glass (most are plastic elements!), it is because you the teleconverters magnifies the lenses to longer focal lenghts and the lenses still have the same front size element and therefor the aperture becomes less sensite. You have to read some more tecnical about lenses ;)
I was tempted with the Sony 200-600mm, but I prefer primes and I hope that we soon will see compact primes of 300mm (4.0, 4.5 and 5.6), 400mm (4.5 and 5.6) and 500mm 5.6. The Sony 200-600 are too big and heavy to carry long hikes.
Really is poor of Sigma to not include the tripod collar. I’m presuming it’s too heavy to use without one.
I'm in love
Sigma not making telephoto lens for nikon full frame
Lengths 😎
That lens is basically a no brainer given it's performance and price. But since you already have the SL2 and Nikon optics you might want to consider this: www.novoflex.de/en/products-637/lens-adapters//adapterfinder-products/adapter-nikon-objektive-an-leica-t-sl-gehaeuse.3642.html?rgerg=38
Great review cute lady. Complete and useful
I don’t like too heavy lens, No way , heavy lens making me so tired 😓
£900 and no tripod collar, cmon sigma...