September 21, 2017, 05:39:33 PM

Author Topic: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary  (Read 6441 times)

Jopa

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 786
Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #15 on: August 23, 2017, 12:54:38 AM »
Great pictures! Wonder where do you live if you have a whole coon family visiting you?

Thanks!  I'm on the west coast of Canada, near Vancouver.  They're very cool.  She comes in the spring to have babies under our deck, and then moves out late in the fall  when they get bigger.  If it's a very harsh winter, they'll come and hide out there, too.  Kind of nice because she gets rid (eats) of all the mice when she comes too :D

We are a popular destination because we don't haze them out, and there is a creek nearby for water.  Plus, plenty of edibles - two plum trees that have fruit for a good 5 months or so, a big yard, rodents, plenty of bugs, and if they get really lucky, eggs from birdies that nested too low.

Last year, I was taking a moon shoot (the super moon), and missed out on the REAL shot, because I didn't have the right gear with me:  a mother raccoon, plus 3 babies looking at me with my camera and tripod, then turning at the moon, wondering what was so going on.  It was hilarious!

I managed to get this one today, a happy moment.  Male downy woodpecker -

That's awesome! :)   Don't worry much about the REAL shot - you'll get it sooner or later.
 
If you ever have extra raccoons - please send them to Mid Tennessee. Rodents recently chewed up some wires in our van, and the repair is going to cost me $500+ (I could have spent this towards the upcoming 85/1.4!!!).

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #15 on: August 23, 2017, 12:54:38 AM »

Talys

  • EOS 6D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 397
  • Canon 6DII
Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #16 on: August 27, 2017, 02:42:30 PM »
@SecureGSM - Thanks for your recommendations.  I found this arca plate on Amazon, that does the trick pretty well, for about USD$11:

https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B01FQ3YRGI/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1



It seems quite solidly manufactured and well-machined.  It fits into a Movo gimbal and most generic arca heads; it does NOT fit into a Manfrotto Xpro ball head (xpro version), which is very picky and needs at least one side to to have a shaper wedge.

The dimensions may be deceptive -- it is very wide.  The length of the arca portion is longer than the foot on the Sigma 150-600C.

There is no stop screw for the front.  However, if you put a blackrapid bobble on the back for the clip, that acts as a safety "screw" for the back, and prevents the camera from sliding forward off the tripod, which is the more dangerous likelihood (as opposed to sliding back into you).

In practice, it works quite well for sling it forward into a slightly loosened arca plate.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2017, 02:47:07 PM by Talys »

Talys

  • EOS 6D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 397
  • Canon 6DII
Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #17 on: August 27, 2017, 03:14:45 PM »
So, more stuff to report.

First, the 1.4 III teleconverter is not really a solution for birds in flight, in my opinion, at least not on 6DII.  Maybe it would work better on a 5DIV; I didn't have one to try. 

At F8, the 6DII's autofocus is just too slow, even in full daylight.  It works, but even more poorly than 600mm/6.3 on the Sigma.  If you have a slow, gently gliding big bird, you get the odd focused shot in, but generally, both are pretty terrible, compared to 400mm at 5.6, which is instant AF.  The worst is when it doesn't lock, and hunts for a couple of seconds.

The solution I ended up packing was 6D2 with 100-400 II on a blackrapid for handheld shots (but with an arca plate in case I wanted to put it on a tripod), and 80D with 150-600 C in a small Thinktank backpack that I'd take out and set up when I wanted a long distance shot.  For a tripod, I settled on using a Manfrotto 190 Go 4-section, with a Movo gimbal as a compromise between weight and stability, but most importantly because the maximum height between column down and column halfway up is the perfect height for me when I have a large head installed.

On my outing, I was hunting for shots of the Great Blue Heron, at a lake.

I managed to catch a few good shots with the 100-400 II, handheld:





I took this one on the tripod with the 100-400 II:



However, there were some cases where the subject was just way too far away.  For example, there was a cool rock, but unless I could walk on water (boats aren't allowed), I wasn't going to get close enough for 400mm.  I took this one at the full length of 600mm on an APSC:



I would like to mention that on that particular picture, I got maybe 5 keepers out of 50 shots.  Most of them had a very undesirable white softness around the head of the subject.  They were manually focused in liveview x 10, and once again, I'd like to whine about how sticky the focus ring of the Sigma is.  They were also all taken with a remote trigger, and I would watch through the viewfinder or through liveview magnification to ensure that there were no jitters, and I took shots at everything from 1/100 to 1/4000, with apertures ranging from 6.3 to 11, and a whole bunch of ISOs.

The shots I liked best were taken at around 1/500, f9, ISO 400; TTL metering said I was at -1EV. 

One last point.  After trying many exposure combinations, I really hate pictures taken on the 80D over ISO 800.  They are just so grainy Really, ISO 500 is as far as I'd go to keep the image sharp and clean; ISO 400 or lower being ideal.

Conclusion from the day of shooting... I really like the 100-400L II, but I didn't get a single, bird in flight keeper with the extender on it.  I think that realistically, for now, if I want 600mm APSC and fast autofocus, it will require big bucks and a prime.

The 150-500C is still a great tool, with excellent reach, and stopped down a little, it takes great pictures.

I will keep both!

alvarow

  • PowerShot G7 X Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 11
Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #18 on: September 12, 2017, 10:14:14 PM »
The 80D will AF at f8 with the 1.4X ... perhaps give that a try as well, maybe you'll be positively surprised...

Talys

  • EOS 6D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 397
  • Canon 6DII
Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #19 on: September 13, 2017, 01:39:05 AM »
The 80D will AF at f8 with the 1.4X ... perhaps give that a try as well, maybe you'll be positively surprised...

I have indeed!

The problem is that I'm not crazy about 80D performance over ISO 800, and at f/8, most photos are over ISO 800 except on the brightest of days or in the perfect sun :(


Larsskv

  • EOS 6D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 448
  • Enthusiast with Canon related GAS
Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #20 on: September 13, 2017, 01:51:19 AM »
The 80D will AF at f8 with the 1.4X ... perhaps give that a try as well, maybe you'll be positively surprised...

I have indeed!

The problem is that I'm not crazy about 80D performance over ISO 800, and at f/8, most photos are over ISO 800 except on the brightest of days or in the perfect sun :(

The AF of the 100-400LII +1.4 III extender works flawlessly on my 1DXII, and probably 5DIV as well.

Maximilian

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1855
  • The dark side - I've been there
Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #21 on: September 13, 2017, 02:29:54 AM »
The 80D will AF at f8 with the 1.4X ... perhaps give that a try as well, maybe you'll be positively surprised...

I have indeed!

The problem is that I'm not crazy about 80D performance over ISO 800, and at f/8, most photos are over ISO 800 except on the brightest of days or in the perfect sun :(

The AF of the 100-400LII +1.4 III extender works flawlessly on my 1DXII, and probably 5DIV as well.
I suppose, Talys was complaining about the high ISO IQ and not the AF.

By the way I can confirm your experience with good AF 100-400LII +1.4 III for the 5D3.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2017, 03:40:32 AM by Maximilian »
sometimes you have to close your eyes to see properly.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #21 on: September 13, 2017, 02:29:54 AM »

Talys

  • EOS 6D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 397
  • Canon 6DII
Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #22 on: September 13, 2017, 03:27:23 AM »
The 80D will AF at f8 with the 1.4X ... perhaps give that a try as well, maybe you'll be positively surprised...

I have indeed!

The problem is that I'm not crazy about 80D performance over ISO 800, and at f/8, most photos are over ISO 800 except on the brightest of days or in the perfect sun :(

The AF of the 100-400LII +1.4 III extender works flawlessly on my 1DXII, and probably 5DIV as well.
I suppose, Talys was complaining about the high ISO IQ and not the AF.

By the way I can confirm your experience with good AF 100-400LII +1.4 III) for the 5D3.

Right :)

About the AF at f/8 on the 6DII:  It's flawless for subjects that are still, moving slowly, or large.  For smaller birds in flight, even against blue sky, it's a little slower than f/5.6.  The difference is small, and not really noticeable on birds that are large.  However, for birds that are small, or insects that are large (like dragonflies) that tiny difference in speed takes "challengingly hard" to "impale myself frustrating".

My initial impression was dissatisfaction, because in backyard shooting, it's mostly little flighty things; however, in "real" birding situations,  it isn't a huge deal with BIF, because of two factors:  first, it's actually brighter wherever I go on birding walks than my back yard, because I have a couple of mature trees that sometimes often cast partial shade; and second (and more importantly) most birders, myself included, find larger birds like waterfowl and birds of prey more fun to photograph in flight than than songbirds :)


AlanF

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2940
Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #23 on: September 13, 2017, 03:34:57 AM »
I find on my very frequent bird photography outings that the Sigma 150-600mm C has now become the most popular telephoto lens, both for Canon and Nikon, and has eclipsed the Canon 100-400mm. I use both the 100-400mm II and 150-600mm C, as well as the 400mm DO II on 5DIV and 5DSR. At 400mm, there is little to choose among them at the centre, but the prime wins out easily at the edges.

For fast birds in flight that are close by, the 400mm DO and 100-400mm II are significantly better than the Sigma at 400mm (I don't use 560-600mm), with very fast and precise AF. For distant slow birds, extenders on the Canon (560/800mm) and the Sigma at 600mm are OK. IS is better on the Canons. Both are much more stable in the viewfinder and about a stop better in practice. The new Sigma 100-400mm C is very good optically but not as good IS as the 150-600mm C.


I can strongly recommend both the 100-400mm II and the 150-600mm C - but you must test that you get a good copy.  If I had to sell one of my two, it would be the Sigma.  But, I am not going to sell it.
5D IV, 5DS R, 7D II, EOS-M, Powershot G3 X, 400mm DO II, 300/2.8 II, 1.4xTC III, 2xTC III, EF 1.8 STM, EF 70-200/4 IS, EF 24-105, 15-85, 100-400 II, Sigma 10-20, Sigma 150-600mm C, EOS-M5 15-45, f/2 22, 11-22, Samyang 8mm f/2.8 fisheye

AlanF

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2940
Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #24 on: September 13, 2017, 05:20:04 AM »


About the AF at f/8 on the 6DII:  It's flawless for subjects that are still, moving slowly, or large.  For smaller birds in flight, even against blue sky, it's a little slower than f/5.6.  The difference is small, and not really noticeable on birds that are large.  However, for birds that are small, or insects that are large (like dragonflies) that tiny difference in speed takes "challengingly hard" to "impale myself frustrating".

My initial impression was dissatisfaction, because in backyard shooting, it's mostly little flighty things; however, in "real" birding situations,  it isn't a huge deal with BIF, because of two factors:  first, it's actually brighter wherever I go on birding walks than my back yard, because I have a couple of mature trees that sometimes often cast partial shade; and second (and more importantly) most birders, myself included, find larger birds like waterfowl and birds of prey more fun to photograph in flight than than songbirds :)

There are not many birds that are more fun to photograph and more difficult than the small Eurasian kingfisher diving.   And you need really fast AF for birds like puffins going past you like rockets.
5D IV, 5DS R, 7D II, EOS-M, Powershot G3 X, 400mm DO II, 300/2.8 II, 1.4xTC III, 2xTC III, EF 1.8 STM, EF 70-200/4 IS, EF 24-105, 15-85, 100-400 II, Sigma 10-20, Sigma 150-600mm C, EOS-M5 15-45, f/2 22, 11-22, Samyang 8mm f/2.8 fisheye

tjbstone

  • PowerShot SX60 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 3
Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #25 on: September 13, 2017, 07:34:06 AM »
"Plus, you can adjust AF from the USB dock, if you're using a body with AFMA"

Can I please clarify the above. I thought that with the Sigma lens and the Dock the adjustments were made to the lens and not in the camera with the AFMA system.

 I ask as I do not have AFMA so only have a limited understanding of it but have recently bought  the Sigma 150 - 600mm C Lens and was considering getting a dock to fine tune it.

Bauldy

Talys

  • EOS 6D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 397
  • Canon 6DII
Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #26 on: September 13, 2017, 09:53:19 AM »
There are not many birds that are more fun to photograph and more difficult than the small Eurasian kingfisher diving.   And you need really fast AF for birds like puffins going past you like rockets.

I am trying to catch a kingfisher here, too -- the belted variety though!  Their approach is very cool.  All the birds that interact with water give great opportunities for amazing shots, and yeah, these guys are not big.

I find on my very frequent bird photography outings that the Sigma 150-600mm C has now become the most popular telephoto lens, both for Canon and Nikon, and has eclipsed the Canon 100-400mm.

Yup, me too.  However, I'm sure that this is because of price.  It's certainly the reason that I bought it first.

People who own the 150-600 always note that it's not really too heavy to take handheld shots -- which is absolutely true.  However, at least for me, it's far too heavy to take hours worth of handheld shots, and birding is as much an endurance exercise as anything.  You need to spot, wait, watch, and track birds -- and also keep that up a couple of hours or more into a hike, and be able to whip it up to eye level very quickly.


I can strongly recommend both the 100-400mm II and the 150-600mm C - but you must test that you get a good copy.  If I had to sell one of my two, it would be the Sigma.  But, I am not going to sell it.

I couldn't agree more!

One other thing that people often neglect to mention is filter size.  The 150-600 is 105mm, which makes every filter spectacularly expensive, if you can even find it.  The available selection is terrible.

The 100-400II is 77mm, which allows it to share filters with a lot of popular L lenses.


"Plus, you can adjust AF from the USB dock, if you're using a body with AFMA"

Can I please clarify the above. I thought that with the Sigma lens and the Dock the adjustments were made to the lens and not in the camera with the AFMA system.

 I ask as I do not have AFMA so only have a limited understanding of it but have recently bought  the Sigma 150 - 600mm C Lens and was considering getting a dock to fine tune it.

Bauldy


You're correct: the lens dock allows you to adjust AF in the lens itself.  However, it's not the easiest thing to use, because what do you adjust it to?  In order to fiddle with it, you need to attach the lens to the dock, front or back adjustment, put it back on, and take another series of test shots, and repeat.

« Last Edit: September 13, 2017, 09:56:51 AM by Talys »

SecureGSM

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #27 on: September 13, 2017, 10:43:12 AM »
Talys, it would be  95mm for the "C' version and 105mm for the "Sports".
there are some very nice UV filters available in this size from HOYA, B+W all priced under US$100.00.

105mm filters are quite a bit more expensive. Still, I was able to source  HOYA Fusion 105mm Protector recently for A$145.00 brand new.



One other thing that people often neglect to mention is filter size.  The 150-600 is 105mm, which makes every filter spectacularly expensive, if you can even find it.  The available selection is terrible.

The 100-400II is 77mm, which allows it to share filters with a lot of popular L lenses.



 .

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #27 on: September 13, 2017, 10:43:12 AM »

SecureGSM

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #28 on: September 13, 2017, 11:14:32 AM »
sorry, overlooked your post.

yep, this looks like a Sirui TY-LP70 knock off.

it does the job though. I looked at this option a while ago and concluded that the mounting 1/4" hole the strap attaches to is positioned way too far from the mounting screw. it creates a stronger torque due to massive leverage.
The absence of the stop screws at the bottom of the plate supported my hesitation to consider the plate any further. I am not brave enough :)

I ended up purchasing this plate instead (Haoge PQR-70L):

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/PQR-70L-Universal-Quick-Release-Plate-Arca-Swiss-Compatible-with-Hand-Strap-Boss-/172107385198

let me explain what makes this plate a better choice for me personally:

1.   1/4"-20 threaded hole located very close to the mounting screw (reduced torque)
2.   2 stop screws at the bottom
3.   fixed backstop - antirotation rim. nice feature as Sigma 150 600 C tripod mount comes with a single mounting 1/4" hole only. ( see photos on the page)
4.   the plate does not protrude towards the lens or back of the camera.

5.   it fits perfectly 5D / 6D level bodies.


 
@SecureGSM - Thanks for your recommendations.  I found this arca plate on Amazon, that does the trick pretty well, for about USD$11:

https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B01FQ3YRGI/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1


It seems quite solidly manufactured and well-machined.  It fits into a Movo gimbal and most generic arca heads; it does NOT fit into a Manfrotto Xpro ball head (xpro version), which is very picky and needs at least one side to to have a shaper wedge.

The dimensions may be deceptive -- it is very wide.  The length of the arca portion is longer than the foot on the Sigma 150-600C.

There is no stop screw for the front.  However, if you put a blackrapid bobble on the back for the clip, that acts as a safety "screw" for the back, and prevents the camera from sliding forward off the tripod, which is the more dangerous likelihood (as opposed to sliding back into you).

In practice, it works quite well for sling it forward into a slightly loosened arca plate.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2017, 11:36:08 AM by SecureGSM »

2n10

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 626
Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #29 on: September 13, 2017, 11:54:27 AM »
So, more stuff to report.

First, the 1.4 III teleconverter is not really a solution for birds in flight, in my opinion, at least not on 6DII.  Maybe it would work better on a 5DIV; I didn't have one to try. 

At F8, the 6DII's autofocus is just too slow, even in full daylight.  It works, but even more poorly than 600mm/6.3 on the Sigma.  If you have a slow, gently gliding big bird, you get the odd focused shot in, but generally, both are pretty terrible, compared to 400mm at 5.6, which is instant AF.  The worst is when it doesn't lock, and hunts for a couple of seconds.

The solution I ended up packing was 6D2 with 100-400 II on a blackrapid for handheld shots (but with an arca plate in case I wanted to put it on a tripod), and 80D with 150-600 C in a small Thinktank backpack that I'd take out and set up when I wanted a long distance shot.  For a tripod, I settled on using a Manfrotto 190 Go 4-section, with a Movo gimbal as a compromise between weight and stability, but most importantly because the maximum height between column down and column halfway up is the perfect height for me when I have a large head installed.

On my outing, I was hunting for shots of the Great Blue Heron, at a lake.

I managed to catch a few good shots with the 100-400 II, handheld:





I took this one on the tripod with the 100-400 II:



However, there were some cases where the subject was just way too far away.  For example, there was a cool rock, but unless I could walk on water (boats aren't allowed), I wasn't going to get close enough for 400mm.  I took this one at the full length of 600mm on an APSC:



I would like to mention that on that particular picture, I got maybe 5 keepers out of 50 shots.  Most of them had a very undesirable white softness around the head of the subject.  They were manually focused in liveview x 10, and once again, I'd like to whine about how sticky the focus ring of the Sigma is.  They were also all taken with a remote trigger, and I would watch through the viewfinder or through liveview magnification to ensure that there were no jitters, and I took shots at everything from 1/100 to 1/4000, with apertures ranging from 6.3 to 11, and a whole bunch of ISOs.

The shots I liked best were taken at around 1/500, f9, ISO 400; TTL metering said I was at -1EV. 

One last point.  After trying many exposure combinations, I really hate pictures taken on the 80D over ISO 800.  They are just so grainy Really, ISO 500 is as far as I'd go to keep the image sharp and clean; ISO 400 or lower being ideal.

Conclusion from the day of shooting... I really like the 100-400L II, but I didn't get a single, bird in flight keeper with the extender on it.  I think that realistically, for now, if I want 600mm APSC and fast autofocus, it will require big bucks and a prime.

The 150-500C is still a great tool, with excellent reach, and stopped down a little, it takes great pictures.

I will keep both!

I have the 7D II and have the same slow focus issue with the 1.4TCIII and 100-400 II.  It works fine for large birds but medium to small I get few keepers if at all.
Canon EOS 7D Mark II and EOS 7D, EF-S 10-22, EF-S 17-55, EF 100 Macro, EF 50 1.4, EF 100-400L Mk II, Tamron 150-600

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 100-400 L II vs Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
« Reply #29 on: September 13, 2017, 11:54:27 AM »