-
UPDATE
The forum will be moving to a new domain in the near future (canonrumorsforum.com). I have turned off "read-only", but I will only leave the two forum nodes you see active for the time being. I don't know at this time how quickly the change will happen, but that will move at a good pace I am sure. ------------------------------------------------------------
Canon Rumors - Your best source for Canon news, rumors and creators
I have been doing many comparisons of my Canon 100-400mm II (I have looked at 3 copies over the years) and my new Tamron 100-400mm, and looking at the records of the 5 copies of the Sigma 100-400mm I have tested.
On the 5DSR and 5DIV, the Canon has the best IS and is the most stable in the viewfinder, the Tamron next best, perhaps a stop worse in practice, and the Sigma the poorest. The AF of the Canon is the fastest, the Tamron next and the Sigma somewhat behind. The IQs are quite similar.
Matters are different on the M5. The Tamron really comes into its own and has at least equal IQ to the Canon at longer distances. The Sigma is hopeless and doesn't focus properly and gives blurred images - something I found early on with liveview but ignored. I have just been told on one of my exceedingly rare visits to Fred Miranda that it is known that some Sigma lenses are not compatible with liveview.
In a big surprise this evening, I found that at 1.6m close up, not only is the Tamron sharper than the Canon on both the 5DSR and M5, the image is 20% bigger in linear dimensions (the Canon is known to have severe focus breathing). At 19m, the Tamton's image is 4.6% larger. In practice, the magnification of the Canon at its MFD is no greater than the Tamron at its longer MFD because of the focus breathing.
I think the Tamron 100-400mm is by far the best long telephoto for the M5. It is light, balances very nicely, the focus speed is limited by the camera and so the faster AF of the Canon lenses is neutralised. The Tamron seems more sensitive to mirror slap on the 5DSR, and this doesn't affect the image from the M5.
On the 5DSR and 5DIV, the Canon has the best IS and is the most stable in the viewfinder, the Tamron next best, perhaps a stop worse in practice, and the Sigma the poorest. The AF of the Canon is the fastest, the Tamron next and the Sigma somewhat behind. The IQs are quite similar.
Matters are different on the M5. The Tamron really comes into its own and has at least equal IQ to the Canon at longer distances. The Sigma is hopeless and doesn't focus properly and gives blurred images - something I found early on with liveview but ignored. I have just been told on one of my exceedingly rare visits to Fred Miranda that it is known that some Sigma lenses are not compatible with liveview.
In a big surprise this evening, I found that at 1.6m close up, not only is the Tamron sharper than the Canon on both the 5DSR and M5, the image is 20% bigger in linear dimensions (the Canon is known to have severe focus breathing). At 19m, the Tamton's image is 4.6% larger. In practice, the magnification of the Canon at its MFD is no greater than the Tamron at its longer MFD because of the focus breathing.
I think the Tamron 100-400mm is by far the best long telephoto for the M5. It is light, balances very nicely, the focus speed is limited by the camera and so the faster AF of the Canon lenses is neutralised. The Tamron seems more sensitive to mirror slap on the 5DSR, and this doesn't affect the image from the M5.