Sigma 150-600 C vs S vs 300/2.8 II + 2xTC vs 100-400 II + 1.4xTC on 7DII

[AlanF]

A quick look.
Our local shop has just got in the two Sigmas so I compared them briefly with the 300/2.8 II + 2xTC III, all at 600mm and the 100-400mm II + 1.4xTC III at 560mm on the 7DII. TDP has the 300/2.8 II + 2xTC III at f/8 better than the rest at f/8. However, www.objektivtest.se measuring MTFs accurately has the Canon at f/5.6 better than the Sigma S at f/6.3 and both the same at f/8.

Comparing shots of far targets on a bright sunny day with very fast shutter speeds, I find the two Sigmas to be inferior at f/6.3 but at f/8 all four lenses have little to choose among them optically.

The big differences are in IS and weight. I found at 600mm the image rapidly jumping around on both Sigmas. The 300/2.8 + TC is relatively stable, and the 100-400 II + TC even more stable. I found it very tiring to hold the Sigma S pointing upwards at 30 degrees, even without the heavy lens hood, much more so than the 300 + TC + hood. The C was OK. The 100-400 + TC was a joy to hold in comparison.

So, all 4 lenses deliver approximately the same goods optically. The choice then depends on what you can afford and you can carry.

 

[meywd]

Thanks for the comparison, I expected the 300mm f/2.8 II to be better, I guess Canon should work on the 1.4x TC IV and 2x TC IV ;D

And for now the 100-400 seem like best choice.

 

[Plilizza]

Any statements you come in useful in the lot.







สมัคร maxbet

 

[Deleted member 91053]

Interested in your observations Alan.
I have tried the Sigma 150-600 (not certain if it was the "C" model) and found that it didn't stack up too well against my 300 F2.8 L IS Mk1 + 2 x Mk3 extender. However, for the price, I was rather impressed by the Sigma! Perhaps it wasn't a C model that I tried?
I cannot speak for the relative merits of the IS systems as I don't use IS - well not since January 2014 anyway.