bought a Sigma 100-400

Started 10 months ago | Discussions thread
rangel28 Contributing Member • Posts: 602
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400

sirhawkeye64 wrote:

I'm leaning towards the 200-500 F-mount despite it being heavy. It's a proven lens and for the money, a good deal I guess at $1400 USD. I had thought about the Tamron 100-400 again, because literally that would be $800 versus the Z for $2700. I mean the Sigma is probably sharper than the TAmron, but I think (from my tests about 2 years ago) the Tamron would focus faster, so that I found to be a trade-off. Honestly, looking for a suitable 100-400 has been a 2 year process, and is still ongoing honestly. Part of me says to just wait and get the Z next year some time....

I have resisted buying the Sigma or Tamron 100mm-400mm for F mount for a number of years now,  as I have the Sigma Contemporary 150mm-600mm. It's a good lens for what it does, especially for the price, although it is  slower than I would like acquiring focus and soft beyond 500mm.  But I have wanted and waited for Nikon to put out a Z version, and, although this is more than I would like to spend, it will be considerably lighter and easier to hike with than the current Sigma 150mm-600mm, and will definitely focus quicker. Combining this lens with the 1.4 teleconverter will give it even more reach.  In my mind I can justify the additional expense because I will use this lens a lot.

I would love to know when Nikon is coming out  with the Z 200mm-600mm, and how much that will cost. With the 100mm-400mm now out, they may delay any announcements regarding the 200mm-600mm to maximize sales of the smaller lens.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
JNo
JNo
JNo
JNo
JNo
JNo
JNo
JNo
JNo
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow