bought a Sigma 100-400

Started 10 months ago | Discussions thread
sirhawkeye64 Veteran Member • Posts: 8,762
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400

rangel28 wrote:

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.

For me, I think not needing the FTZ and the ability to add a good quality TC (was looking at the 1.4x) will eventually drive me to buy this lens, but it will be in well into 2022 probably before I do. If this is sharp at the long end (I haven't checked charts or comparisons to be honest) then that will make it all that more appealing, because that's where I think the Tamron and Sigma fall short a little, atl east in the corners, and was thinking I could use the Z 100-400 for some landscape if I wanted to as well.

I think the 100-400 will be fine on my Z6 II in terms of wildlife (and I don't shoot a ton of wildlife, which ,as a I mentioned, is why I've held out this long on buying a tele zoom).

-- hide signature --

(NOTE: If I don't reply to a direct comment in the forums, it's likely I unsubscribed from the thread.)

 sirhawkeye64's gear list:sirhawkeye64's gear list
Nikon Z6 II Nikon Z7 II GoPro Hero8 Black Nikon AP-F 70-300mm F4.5-5.6E Nikon Z 50mm F1.8 +10 more
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