Sigma 100-400mm or 150-600mm C? EF vs E?

M_digicapt said:

Hi, I’ve been considering adapting one of this lenses to Olympus M43, but haven’t found conclusive info on how the Viltrox EF-M43 adapter works with them… So, I might get a Sony or Canon Crop mirrorless instead.

When one adds the price of the 100-400mm’s tripod collar the prices are about the same.

Is the 100-400mm optically better than the 150-600mm C? Are there are any other advantages over the 150-600mm other than size/weight?

Is Sony and Canon's versions performance equal?

Thanks

Click to expand...

Tord S Eriksson said:

M_digicapt said:

Hi, I’ve been considering adapting one of this lenses to Olympus M43, but haven’t found conclusive info on how the Viltrox EF-M43 adapter works with them… So, I might get a Sony or Canon Crop mirrorless instead.

When one adds the price of the 100-400mm’s tripod collar the prices are about the same.

Is the 100-400mm optically better than the 150-600mm C? Are there are any other advantages over the 150-600mm other than size/weight?

Is Sony and Canon's versions performance equal?

Thanks

Click to expand...

The DSLR versions of the 100-400C are optically not the same as those for mirrorless, and those for mirrorless have a better optical design, I've heard: I enjoy my DSLR version a lot, I must say, using it mostly with Nikon DX and Nikon 1 cameras.
I don't think the optics design of the bigger 150-600 C is worse than the 100-400 C, it's just a bit heavier!
I have the big S version of the latter, a lens I call The Beast, amazingly fast focus but a bit front-heavy, thus not as portable as the C version. Mine is very weather-resistant, and more or less dust-proof, which the C versions are not. Quite a bit heavier than the C, too.
Thus a beast to bring along, but really nice when you've arrived at the hide!

All the best,

Tord

Click to expand...

M_digicapt said:

Thanks. I don't have the budget to get the 100-400mm C and the 150-600mm S, would the 150-600mm C be a better option than the 100-400mm if I already have smaller options?

Click to expand...

bwbrock said:

M_digicapt said:

Thanks. I don't have the budget to get the 100-400mm C and the 150-600mm S, would the 150-600mm C be a better option than the 100-400mm if I already have smaller options?

Click to expand...

The Sigma sport version, 150-600S, was heavier, nose-heavy, and did not feel nimble for handheld use to me when I first played with it in my local pro shop; I was not aware of a "C" Contemporary version until late 2019, to be quite honest.

After a couple years ignoring claims about the capabilities of the Sigma 150-600 lenses, I bought a used 150-600C this year at a really good price figuring if it wasn't good enough I could flip it for little loss. I'm pleasantly surprised at how good it is.

While it's NOT close to the $12,000 600/f4 (focus-speed/contrast/sharpness), the Sigma 150-600C is lightweight and sharp corner to corner wide open (f6.3) at all focal lengths on my 5Dsr and 1DxmkII bodies.

I've not used the 150-600C on Canon R bodies, but the autofocus is as good or better than my Canon 100-400 when used on my DSLRs and on my Canon M6mkII in one-shot or servo focus. The 100-400 is now a backup since getting the 150-600C if that's any indication.

Click to expand...

M_digicapt said:

Thanks. Do you have the Canon 100-400mm mki or mkii?

Click to expand...

bwbrock said:

M_digicapt said:

Thanks. Do you have the Canon 100-400mm mki or mkii?

Click to expand...

The mkI 100-400, and my copy is a very good one. I've also used the mkII 100-400 but didn't feel it was that noticeably different (image quality) than my mkI but it had a better zoom control. The mkII focused faster than my mkI and the Sigma 150-600C and I'd say the mkII is also a little sharper with a bit more contrast at the long end than either. I'm unable to say how a 1.4x on the 100-400 mkII would compare to the Sigma on the long end, though.

If you foresee needing 400mm or longer most of the time, I'd suggest the 150-600; I'm of the opinion converters, even the best ones, affect image quality too much for my taste. I'm at 600mm well over half the time when using the Sigma 150-600 on full frame bodies thus far and have desired 800mm on occasion, FWIW. When air show season gets underway, the 150-600 will see its full range used a lot.

Click to expand...

bwbrock said:

M_digicapt said:

Thanks. Do you have the Canon 100-400mm mki or mkii?

Click to expand...

The mkI 100-400, and my copy is a very good one. I've also used the mkII 100-400 but didn't feel it was that noticeably different (image quality) than my mkI but it had a better zoom control. The mkII focused faster than my mkI and the Sigma 150-600C and I'd say the mkII is also a little sharper with a bit more contrast at the long end than either. I'm unable to say how a 1.4x on the 100-400 mkII would compare to the Sigma on the long end, though.

If you foresee needing 400mm or longer most of the time, I'd suggest the 150-600; I'm of the opinion converters, even the best ones, affect image quality too much for my taste. I'm at 600mm well over half the time when using the Sigma 150-600 on full frame bodies thus far and have desired 800mm on occasion, FWIW. When air show season gets underway, the 150-600 will see its full range used a lot.

Click to expand...

Tord S Eriksson said:

bwbrock said:

M_digicapt said:

Thanks. Do you have the Canon 100-400mm mki or mkii?

Click to expand...

The mkI 100-400, and my copy is a very good one. I've also used the mkII 100-400 but didn't feel it was that noticeably different (image quality) than my mkI but it had a better zoom control. The mkII focused faster than my mkI and the Sigma 150-600C and I'd say the mkII is also a little sharper with a bit more contrast at the long end than either. I'm unable to say how a 1.4x on the 100-400 mkII would compare to the Sigma on the long end, though.

If you foresee needing 400mm or longer most of the time, I'd suggest the 150-600; I'm of the opinion converters, even the best ones, affect image quality too much for my taste. I'm at 600mm well over half the time when using the Sigma 150-600 on full frame bodies thus far and have desired 800mm on occasion, FWIW. When air show season gets underway, the 150-600 will see its full range used a lot.

Click to expand...

The focusing speed of the Beast is its best quality, and that it is dust-proof (or very nearly so), and that it has very nice Bokeh. My copy's sharpness is impressive, but not outstanding.

The 100-400 C is a very versatile lens, due to its low weight, and small size.

I agree that the 150-600 C seems to be a fair combination of the S's reach and the 100-400's lower cost, but weather-resistance is something I've come to appreciate a lot over the years (neither C lens gives you that).

Click to expand...