Which 150-600 for R6

[killswitch]

I am looking to get a used 150-600 from Sigma or Tamron. Between these two any of you faced any noticeable focus hunting at the telephoto end (with its widest aperture) on a R6. I once used a Tamron 150-600 v1 and the thing that I felt about it was the zoom ring was tight and to go from 150 to 600 required a lot of twist. Not sure if that is normal for a zoom of this range.

Ideally I would love to get a EF 100-400 II or a RF 100-500 but too expensive right now. Would love to see your favorite photos taken with any of the 150-600. Thanks.

 

[shadowsports]

Greetings,
I've got the Sigma 150-600c

I do not care for Tamron lenses because the zoom rings operate in reverse of Canon and Sigma glass. Maybe this won't bother you but I do not care for it. All are long-throw zooms. Going all the way in or out takes two grip and roll rotations.

Many praise the Tamron for sharpness and updated lens coatings, compared to the Sigma's Contemporary and Sports lines. I never noticed a dramatic difference that made me feel I had made a bad choice. The Sigma Sports model has higher quality optics in comparison to the Contemporary version. You'll pay for it both in price and weight.

Biggest differentiator for me. Historically Tamron doesn't do as good of a job updating the firmware on its lenses. Tamron lenses have more compatibility issues with newer bodies than Sigma ever has. Sigma has also been much more responsive addressing these types of issues. Regardless of which you buy, you'll want to get the Sigma Dock or Tap-In to upgrade and adjust (if needed) either lens.

We know the 150-600c does not play well with the R7. All of these lenses perform about the same on MILC bodies. They do not have the same AF capability that Canon EF or RF glass has. Some days, scenarios will be better than others. Lighting, background and subject. Dark bird, dark background the AF might struggle a bit. Reeds, and branches can also cause some hunting and the AF may lose tracking while panning, especially if the background is busy. Stationary subjects will be better. Other items which affect AF with these lenses. One Shot vs Servo AF, IS (which you pretty much need for handheld shots) and distance to your subject.

Do not take what I've said as gospel. I am not a wildlife shooter. I primarily shoot architecture and landscapes. I have shot enough with my Sigma lenses on both DSLR and MILC under various conditions to see the strengths and weaknesses of each. What do I ultimately recommend? You will have the best experience with Canon glass, whether adapted or native. 3rd party EF lenses do not focus as quickly or track as well as Canon glass does. Its very close in some cases but Canon glass will deliver a higher number of keepers in the end.

 

[davidespinosa]

@killswitch

The EF 100-400 II is $1600 used:
https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/canon-ef-100-400mm-f-4-5-5-6-l-is-ii-usm

But everybody likes the RF 100-400, which is US $600 new !
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1663581-REG/canon_rf_100_400mm_f_5_6_8_is.html

 

[shadowsports]

Big difference between 400 and 600. I own the150-600c, RF100-400 and RF100-500 with a 1.4x TC.

There are big reasons to get the RF100-500 over the 600c, but if comparing to the RF100-400, that's a different story, price and IQ wise. Its not that the 400 isn't a good lens, it is. However, most people considering these lenses are looking for the reach beyond 400mm. Especially on a FF body.

 

[killswitch]

@killswitch

The EF 100-400 II is $1600 used:
https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/canon-ef-100-400mm-f-4-5-5-6-l-is-ii-usm

But everybody likes the RF 100-400, which is US $600 new !
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1663581-REG/canon_rf_100_400mm_f_5_6_8_is.html

Wow, I had not considered RF 100-400. This is actually very interesting. Now the question is I have not updated my R6 firmware so is there 1.6 crop mode ? That would seal the deal for me.

 

[killswitch]

Greetings,
I've got the Sigma 150-600c

I do not care for Tamron lenses because the zoom rings operate in reverse of Canon and Sigma glass. Maybe this won't bother you but I do not care for it. All are long-throw zooms. Going all the way in or out takes two grip and roll rotations.

Many praise the Tamron for sharpness and updated lens coatings, compared to the Sigma's Contemporary and Sports lines. I never noticed a dramatic difference that made me feel I had made a bad choice. The Sigma Sports model has higher quality optics in comparison to the Contemporary version. You'll pay for it both in price and weight.

Biggest differentiator for me. Historically Tamron doesn't do as good of a job updating the firmware on its lenses. Tamron lenses have more compatibility issues with newer bodies than Sigma ever has. Sigma has also been much more responsive addressing these types of issues. Regardless of which you buy, you'll want to get the Sigma Dock or Tap-In to upgrade and adjust (if needed) either lens.

We know the 150-600c does not play well with the R7. All of these lenses perform about the same on MILC bodies. They do not have the same AF capability that Canon EF or RF glass has. Some days, scenarios will be better than others. Lighting, background and subject. Dark bird, dark background the AF might struggle a bit. Reeds, and branches can also cause some hunting and the AF may lose tracking while panning, especially if the background is busy. Stationary subjects will be better. Other items which affect AF with these lenses. One Shot vs Servo AF, IS (which you pretty much need for handheld shots) and distance to your subject.

Do not take what I've said as gospel. I am not a wildlife shooter. I primarily shoot architecture and landscapes. I have shot enough with my Sigma lenses on both DSLR and MILC under various conditions to see the strengths and weaknesses of each. What do I ultimately recommend? You will have the best experience with Canon glass, whether adapted or native. 3rd party EF lenses do not focus as quickly or track as well as Canon glass does. Its very close in some cases but Canon glass will deliver a higher number of keepers in the end.

Ya the opposite zoom like Nikon is a deal breaker for me. So tamron is out of the question for me. Will look into Canon lenses.

 

[danfaz]

Now the question is I have not updated my R6 firmware so is there 1.6 crop mode ?

Yes, and the RF 100-400 is compatible with the 1.4 and 2X extenders

 

[Jethro]

Wow, I had not considered RF 100-400. This is actually very interesting. Now the question is I have not updated my R6 firmware so is there 1.6 crop mode ? That would seal the deal for me.

It's an excellent lens - I have it and recommend it highly. If you do a search of this site, you'll find some quite detailed analysis from @AlanF on the RF 100-400's performance. Hint: very good indeed ...

 

[davidespinosa]

If you do a search of this site, you'll find some quite detailed analysis from @AlanF on the RF 100-400's performance. Hint: very good indeed ...

Can you or @AlanF give a link ?
I tried searching for 10-15 minutes but didn't find it.
Thanks !

 

[shadowsports]

If you are OK with 400mm, then its a better choice over 3rd party. It will not experience the hunting or tracking issues seen in the other gear. It is f8 at 400 but honestly this has not bothered me.

 

[AJ]

I have a Sigma 150-600 contemporary and I am very, very happy with it. AF is fast, silent, and accurate. IS/OS is rock solid - in fact I use the lens handheld at 600 mm with good results. My lens is sharp, even at 600 mm. Again: very, very happy. This lens is a real bargain when you catch it on sale.
At the time of purchase I was torn between the Tamron and Sigma, and in the end I choose the Sigma based on more pleasing bokeh, in the sample images I found on the net. I never did have a chance to compare the two head-to-head, though. I suspect the Tamron is just as awesome.

 

[AlanF]

Can you or @AlanF give a link ?
I tried searching for 10-15 minutes but didn't find it.
Thanks !

Here's a tip: go to the search function, type in RF100-400 for the subject, then check the Titles Only box, and then by AlanF. Another tip; repeat the search using RF 100-400 with a space between the F and the 100, as I am not consistent. And, if you want to find even more photos and comments, do the search with "everywhere" and don't check Titles Only.

 

[killswitch]

Ok so I checked out some RF photos take with the RF 100-400 and was impressed. For the price point and size it’s pretty darn good. And it can take 1.4x TC as well, it seems.

 

[davidespinosa]

Here's a tip: go to the search function, type in RF100-400 for the subject, then check the Titles Only box, and then by AlanF. Another tip; repeat the search using RF 100-400 with a space between the F and the 100, as I am not consistent.

No results found.

 

[shadowsports]

Ok so I checked out some RF photos take with the RF 100-400 and was impressed. For the price point and size it’s pretty darn good. And it can take 1.4x TC as well, it seems.

Yes, but.. please be mindful of the following;

This is why I brought up the difference between 400 and 600mm above. You are losing some aperture and AF ability when using a TC.

 

[AlanF]

No results found.

You have to persevere to search.

 

[killswitch]

Don’t know what to say. After reading up on the RF 100-400 I was looking to snag a new one off B&H. Lucky me someone was selling an almost new condition for $450 with tripod collar and B+W filter. Snagged it right away. Thanks to everyone here who mentioned RF 100-400.

 

[killswitch]

Yes, but.. please be mindful of the following;
View attachment 208109
This is why I brought up the difference between 400 and 600mm above. You are losing some aperture and AF ability when using a TC.

Thanks yeah I was aware of the AF points limitation and aperture.

 

[JTM-77]

Big difference between 400 and 600. I own the150-600c, RF100-400 and RF100-500 with a 1.4x TC.

There are big reasons to get the RF100-500 over the 600c, but if comparing to the RF100-400, that's a different story, price and IQ wise. Its not that the 400 isn't a good lens, it is. However, most people considering these lenses are looking for the reach beyond 400mm. Especially on a FF body.

That 100-500 is not that good plus you can't use the 1.4x TC with it until 300-500 it wont physically work the 100-400 is the best lens.

 

[shadowsports]

That 100-500 is not that good plus you can't use the 1.4x TC with it until 300-500 it wont physically work the 100-400 is the best lens.

Thanks for this information. I own all three of these lenses + the 1.4x TC. I'm aware of the EF's performance limitations when adapted to a mirrorless body, the physical limitation of using a TC with the 100-500L, and the IQ difference between the 100-400 and 100-500L. That must be why Canon charges $600 for the 400 and $3,000 for the 500... Because "it's not that good".