Canon 100-400mm II vs Sigma 150-600mm C

[AlanF]

The Polish language site of Lenstip posted last night their review of the 100-400mm II http://www.optyczne.pl/357.1-Test_obiektywu-Test_Canon_EF_100-400_mm_f_4.5-5.6L_IS_II_USM.html

I have made a collage of their measured MTFs with those of the Sigma 150-600mm C. Some points worth noting are the consistency of the Canon across all focal lengths, and it is optimised close to the maximum. The IS of the Canon is about a stop better than those of the two versions of the Sigma.

A caveat. Lenstip get their lenses on loan from Canon or Sigma, and sample variation appears to be greater for Sigma from various reports. TDP site has the Canon better than the Sigma S at all overlapping focal lengths, and Bryan has compared two lenses of each he has purchased independently. Lenstip has the S marginally better at shorter focal lengths. Draw your own conclusions.

 

[Rahul]

Interesting comparison.

I guess the real world shooting difference will be greater because of the difference in IS, as you very rightly pointed out and also the difference in the weight between the two lenses. Handheld shooting with the 100-400 II will be considerably easier (and having better IQ).

What I'm really curious about is how these the Sigmas will match up against a 100-400 II with a 1.4x TC.

 

[AlanF]

According to the Swedish experts on lensfreaks, a 1.4xTC lowers MTFs by about 10%, so you can get an approximation from that. They have told me me that they will test the 100-400 in somewhat over a month's time, hopefully with a 1.4xTC as well.