Sigma Launches 300-600mm F4 for Sony and L-Mount

[TexPhoto]

Sigma has announced a 300-600mm f4 lens.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

Quick specs

Lens type	Zoom lens
Focal length	300–600 mm
Image stab.	Yes
Lens mount	L-Mount, Sony FE
Max aperture	F4
Min aperture	F22
Min focus	2.80 m (110.24″)
Max magnification	0.17×
Weight	3985 g (8.79 lb)
Length	468 mm (18.42″)

 

[twoheadedboy]

Super zoom for RF-S as well https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1881812-REG/sigma_887972_16_300mm_f_3_5_6_7_dc_os.html

 

[john1970]

A very desirable focal range, fast and the price is reasonable given the specs. The only two downsides are the weight at ~9 pounds and the length 18.42" which is too long to fit in a Thinktank Advantage XT.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Qudos to Sigma, they have cetainly beat Canon in getting this lens from the CAD design into production. leaving aside the questions of Sigma's AF and IS tech compared to the major OEM brands.
My curiosity is drawn to the statement of "as sharp as a prime" but flexibility of a zoom. Which bench mark? Sigma's wildlife and sports primes haven't been particaulrly sharp compared to OEM. The other question is zoom focal breathing and actual real world zoom focal length vs zoom focal length.

A lot of Sigma zooms don't even come close to the stated wide or long focal length. The Sigma 120-300/f2.8 is great example of very poor focal breathing and greatly over-exaggerated focal length at the wide and long setting. the 120-300 was a lot longer than 120mm and a lot less than 300mm. With the very very poor focal breathing at close focus distances...this lens wasn't worth the weight / bulk / cost / aggrevation over a regular 70-200/f2.8.
Generally it makes more sense to carry a OEM 70-200/2.8 and a OEM 300/f2.8 than a single Sigma 120-300/2.8. Unlike the Canon 100-300/2.8 which really does an amazing job at covering both ranges.
Although the Sigma 120-300/2.8 is a very old design...it's still a historical reference point. Poor IS, not particularly sharp wide open, heavy vignetting, awful focal length breathing, overly heavy, closer to 280mm @ infinity ( a lot less at MFD), flares badly, bigger than a 300mm prime, AF slow / ponderous and inaccurate. As to brand's the long term reliability, we all know that Sigma lenses are not built to the same standards as the OEM brands. Don't expect 20+ perfect reliability and wear and still have serious resale value.

 

[Nemorino]

3985g? Yes, it's a sport lens.
And maybe the first big white made by Sigma.

 

[P-visie]

3985g? Yes, it's a sport lens.
And maybe the first big white made by Sigma.

The Sigma zoom is about the same weight as the EF 600mm f4 II.

 

[Maximilian]

I like competiton like that. Good price for a surely good lens. Maybe a little bit heavy...

The Sigma zoom is about the same weight as the EF 600mm f4 II.

EF 600mm f/4L IS III USM: 3.050 g
RF 600mm F4L IS USM: 3.090 g
RF 100-300mm F2.8L IS USM+2x Ext.: 2.590 g + 340 g = 2.930 g

Seems like Canon could improve lately...

 

[AlanF]

The Sigma zoom is about the same weight as the EF 600mm f4 II.

@neuroanatomist hand holds the EF 600mm f/4 II. The only real advantage of the version III is that they knocked 900g off the weight, which makes a huge difference.

 

[Maximilian]

Super zoom for RF-S as well https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1881812-REG/sigma_887972_16_300mm_f_3_5_6_7_dc_os.html

Thanks for sharing.

I can understand the convenience such a lens brings to some, esp. for travelling.
But for me, the compromise in IQ vs. zoom factor always was the dealbreaker.
When I buy an ILC system, even during travel I prefer changing the lenses.
Otherwise, I would have bought a super zoom bridge camera...

 

[AlanF]

Thanks for sharing.

I can understand the convenience such a lens brings to some, esp. for travelling.
But for me, the compromise in IQ vs. zoom factor always was the dealbreaker.
When I buy an ILC system, even during travel I prefer changing the lenses.
Otherwise, I would have bought a super zoom bridge camera...

You currently shoot with a RF 100-500mm and previously with an EF 100-400mm ii zoom. Before you justify it, I have to write that the RF 100-300mm is about as sharp as the legendary sharp EF 300mm f/2.8 ii; the EF 100-400mm f/5.6 ii is sharper than the classic EF 400mm f5.6; and my RF 100-500mm f/7.1 is pretty close to my former Nikon 500mm 500mm PF f/5.6. The truth is that zoom design has really improved. Here are Canon's MTF plots for the EF 300mm f2.8 and the RF Zoom.

 

[twoheadedboy]

You currently shoot with a RF 100-500mm and previously with an EF 100-400mm ii zoom. Before you justify it, I have to write that the RF 100-300mm is about as sharp as the legendary sharp EF 300mm f/2.8 ii; the EF 100-400mm f/5.6 ii is sharper than the classic EF 400mm f5.6; and my RF 100-500mm f/7.1 is pretty close to my former Nikon 500mm 500mm PF f/5.6. The truth is that zoom design has really improved. Here are Canon's MTF plots for the EF 300mm f2.8 and the RF Zoom.

View attachment 222663View attachment 222664

He was talking about the super zoom (over 18x) I shared.

 

[Maximilian]

You currently shoot with a RF 100-500mm and previously with an EF 100-400mm ii zoom. Before you justify it, I have to write that the RF 100-300mm is about as sharp as the legendary sharp EF 300mm f/2.8 ii; the EF 100-400mm f/5.6 ii is sharper than the classic EF 400mm f5.6; and my RF 100-500mm f/7.1 is pretty close to my former Nikon 500mm 500mm PF f/5.6. The truth is that zoom design has really improved. Here are Canon's MTF plots for the EF 300mm f2.8 and the RF Zoom.

Alan, I suppose you got my post wrong. I was not referring to primes.
I was referring to such super zooms with a zoom factor of more than 10 to 15 times vs. "normal" zooms.

The RF-S zoom Sigma 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS Contemporary Lens even has a zoom factor of 18,75.
I was not referring to the Sigma 300-600mm F4 DG OS | Sports.

Zooms with a moderate zoom factor of about 4 to 5 have a really great IQ today.
That's the reason why I'm using the lenses you were mentioning and would love to use the RF 100-300L

 

[AlanF]

Alan, I suppose you got my post wrong. I was not referring to primes.
I was referring to such super zooms with a zoom factor of more than 10 to 15 times vs. "normal" zooms.

The RF-S zoom Sigma 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS Contemporary Lens even has a zoom factor of 18,75.
I was not referring to the Sigma 300-600mm F4 DG OS | Sports.

Zooms with a moderate zoom factor of about 4 to 5 have a really great IQ today.
That's the reason why I'm using the lenses you were mentioning and would love to use the RF 100-300L

I had missed that. However, the Zeiss zoom on the Sony RX10iv with its FF fov of 24-600mm is really sharp at both ends.

 

[Maximilian]

I had missed that.

Too often, I miss something, too. Too much info per time to read

However, the Zeiss zoom on the Sony RX10iv with its FF fov of 24-600mm is really sharp at both ends.

And that's why I wrote:

Otherwise, I would have bought a super zoom bridge camera...

 

[TexPhoto]

A little more detail in this video:

Hands on preview: Sigma BF camera, 300-600mm f/4, & 16-300mm lenses

If you've found this or other videos I've made to be helpful, then support me on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/christopherfrost?ty=hEquipment I use to mak...

youtu.be

 

[AJ]

MTF is about as good as it gets

 

[AlanF]

MTF is about as good as it gets
View attachment 222711

Do you have a link to that I have searched the Sigma site without success to find it. The MTFs here are Geometric, not corrected for diffraction, and overestimate the contrast and resolution of the lens.

 

[AJ]

Alan, I found the chart with an image search. The image came from the Sigma website, but when I visit the site I don't see the graph? Wish I had a better source....

 

[AlanF]

Alan, I found the chart with an image search. The image came from the Sigma website, but when I visit the site I don't see the graph? Wish I had a better source....

Thanks for looking. I searched Sigma sites yesterday and again today as someone had posted elsewhere they had seen it.
Edit - found them on the German site! They don't look as good when corrected for diffraction.

 

[TexPhoto]

Fro Review is out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP1AsOIy1FM