Copy variation sigma zooms?

Hello

I hear about copy variation often, but I was never sure the extent. I had a sigma 150-600C on Canon EF mount adapted to my Fuji XT3. The lens at 600mm was quite poor. When I moved to a Nikon Z6 i got an F mount copy of the same lens and it was notably better at 600mm. I attributed this to 600mm being easier to handhold on FF than crop due to the crop factor needing higher shutter speeds, and possibly the Fuji X Trans issues.

However, i am currently trialling a sigma 100-400 on my Z6 and the 400mm performance disappointed me a little. Stopping down to f/8 helps, but it's not as good as 300mm on the 70-300 AFP I am also trialling, which I can then crop.

This makes me wonder if indeed I did stumble across a sharp copy of the 150-600C this time compared to last time and the variation is noticeable without pixel zooming. I feel it is. Often people are criticised for worrying about sharpness too much, which is fair, but I'm thinking it's a genuine issue this variation.

What extent have you guys experienced variation in the same lens, and how common do you think it is in third party zooms versus OEM?

How can we minimise this impact? Are the more expensive professional lenses held to a higher QC level and copy variation eliminated?

Just a curiosity, cheers!

Sigma has some serious quality control. Every individual global vision lens must pass multiple optical tests. This is rumored to be the reason why the latest version of the 120-300 is better optically than the previous pre global vision 120-300 which was confirmed to have an identical optical formula.

Lenses, especially complex mega zooms, can get knocked out of alignment. If one copy is significantly worse than the other, it's possible that there was some impact damage. That doesn't necessarily mean it was dropped. A hard enough bump while extended could tweak the lens just enough to throw it off a little.

Did you purchase the EF mount version brand new? Were there ever any mishaps with it?

Ad12 said:

However, i am currently trialling a sigma 100-400 on my Z6 and the 400mm performance disappointed me a little. Stopping down to f/8 helps, but it's not as good as 300mm on the 70-300 AFP I am also trialling, which I can then crop.

Click to expand...

If you are just trialling the sig 100-400 then I should send it back. Likely had a bump as X Ray suggests.

I have the afp 70-300 and the sig 100-400

On a Z6, they are both very sharp at the longest zoom and wide open.. You certainly shouldn't need to stop down to f8. ( likewise, they are both sharp on the higher pixel density of my aps-c DSLR )

rich_cx139 said:

Ad12 said:

However, i am currently trialling a sigma 100-400 on my Z6 and the 400mm performance disappointed me a little. Stopping down to f/8 helps, but it's not as good as 300mm on the 70-300 AFP I am also trialling, which I can then crop.

Click to expand...

If you are just trialling the sig 100-400 then I should send it back.

I have the afp 70-300 and the sig 100-400

On a Z6, they are both very sharp at the longest zoom and wide open.. You certainly shouldn't need to stop down to f8. ( likewise, they are both sharp on the higher pixel density of my aps-c DSLR )

Click to expand...

My 100-400 C was out of focus at infinity (when used on my D7500), after I cleaned it from dust (that is, took off the front lens element, deleted the dust, and then reassembled it), but I did the classic Sigma setup for the lens with the Sigma dock, using the display to focus on infinity, and then trying various +/- settings 5 steps apart to begin with and then using single +/- steps till I found one that gave correct focus at infinity using the camera's AF sensor. No other changes were needed.

Been surprised, to say it mildly, that they haven't made a dust-resistant version of that lovely lens.

rich_cx139 said:

Ad12 said:

However, i am currently trialling a sigma 100-400 on my Z6 and the 400mm performance disappointed me a little. Stopping down to f/8 helps, but it's not as good as 300mm on the 70-300 AFP I am also trialling, which I can then crop.

Click to expand...

If you are just trialling the sig 100-400 then I should send it back. Likely had a bump as X Ray suggests.

I have the afp 70-300 and the sig 100-400

On a Z6, they are both very sharp at the longest zoom and wide open.. You certainly shouldn't need to stop down to f8. ( likewise, they are both sharp on the higher pixel density of my aps-c DSLR )

Click to expand...

I'm looking at some more images from both, and I think the 70-300 is crisper at 300mm than the sigma 100-400 at 400mm wide open, but stopping down to f/8 and with some Lightroom massaging the images come out good I think. I think the OS on the sigma is more temperamental and can have an impact, whereas the Nikon seems rock solid consistent.

I don't think I need to send the 400 back as it's not "faulty" in the sense of it's sharpness, it's just not quite as good as i'd like at f/6.3. At f/8 it is better, but the reviews seem to agree with this.

Here are some examples which I am fairly happy with. Is this typical of the lens? I'm happy with these ones, which means possibly the OS or technique is having a part to play somewhere. I do stand by though that it's better at f/8, for sure. These are a mix from both lenses. I feel the 70-300 has more bite.

Nice pics - I am not ignoring your post but need to get time on my mac ( rather than just on a phone ) to have a good look at these images.

I did some side by side testing of the afp fx and the sigma on a z6 some time ago but couldn’t really separate them - they are both excellent optics in my opinion - but this is only on a 24mpx body. Perhaps I need to have another look see and I haven’t been out and about much in the last two years.

I do suspect copy variation is a factor though it seems to affect areas other than centre frame. This is only an observation from Roger at Lensrentals testing of multiple copies ( shorter FLs usually ) unless I am missing something.

Stating the obvious - I just have one copy it each of those lenses. The only thing about the sigma that I noted was that it required very little AF fine tuning on my D500 - other long lenses that I have or had ie the tamron 150-600 versions both needed much more offsets. I don’t know if that is relevant or not.

Ad12 said:

Hello

I hear about copy variation often, but I was never sure the extent. I had a sigma 150-600C on Canon EF mount adapted to my Fuji XT3. The lens at 600mm was quite poor. When I moved to a Nikon Z6 i got an F mount copy of the same lens and it was notably better at 600mm. I attributed this to 600mm being easier to handhold on FF than crop due to the crop factor needing higher shutter speeds, and possibly the Fuji X Trans issues.

However, i am currently trialling a sigma 100-400 on my Z6 and the 400mm performance disappointed me a little. Stopping down to f/8 helps, but it's not as good as 300mm on the 70-300 AFP I am also trialling, which I can then crop.

Click to expand...

Interesting. I also found my AF-P 70- 300mm lens quite shart at 300mm. First on my D3400...then D7500...and now Z 50.

Ad12 said:

This makes me wonder if indeed I did stumble across a sharp copy of the 150-600C this time compared to last time and the variation is noticeable without pixel zooming. I feel it is. Often people are criticised for worrying about sharpness too much, which is fair, but I'm thinking it's a genuine issue this variation.

Click to expand...

Could be. I think so...as my Sigma 100-400mm lens is also sharp at 400mm as my Z 50-250 and AF-P 70- 300mm are at the telephoto end.

Even AF is better.

I shoot my Sigma wide open as is seems sharp without stepping down.

Here is a few examples:













BTW .. I bought mine used on Ebay

Ad12 said:

What extent have you guys experienced variation in the same lens, and how common do you think it is in third party zooms versus OEM?

How can we minimise this impact?

Click to expand...

Dont know

Ad12 said:

Are the more expensive professional lenses held to a higher QC level and copy variation eliminated?

Just a curiosity, cheers!

Click to expand...

Can you return it?

Perhaps sell it and tey another one?

ANAYV

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

Hello

I hear about copy variation often, but I was never sure the extent. I had a sigma 150-600C on Canon EF mount adapted to my Fuji XT3. The lens at 600mm was quite poor. When I moved to a Nikon Z6 i got an F mount copy of the same lens and it was notably better at 600mm. I attributed this to 600mm being easier to handhold on FF than crop due to the crop factor needing higher shutter speeds, and possibly the Fuji X Trans issues.

However, i am currently trialling a sigma 100-400 on my Z6 and the 400mm performance disappointed me a little. Stopping down to f/8 helps, but it's not as good as 300mm on the 70-300 AFP I am also trialling, which I can then crop.

Click to expand...

Interesting. I also found my AF-P 70- 300mm lens quite shart at 300mm. First on my D3400...then D7500...and now Z 50.

ANAYV said:

This makes me wonder if indeed I did stumble across a sharp copy of the 150-600C this time compared to last time and the variation is noticeable without pixel zooming. I feel it is. Often people are criticised for worrying about sharpness too much, which is fair, but I'm thinking it's a genuine issue this variation.

Click to expand...

Could be. I think so...as my Sigma 100-400mm lens is also sharp at 400mm as my Z 50-250 and AF-P 70- 300mm are at the telephoto end.

Even AF is better.

I shoot my Sigma wide open as is seems sharp without stepping down.

Here is a few examples:







BTW .. I bought mine used on Ebay

ANAYV said:

What extent have you guys experienced variation in the same lens, and how common do you think it is in third party zooms versus OEM?

How can we minimise this impact?

Click to expand...

Dont know

ANAYV said:

Are the more expensive professional lenses held to a higher QC level and copy variation eliminated?

Just a curiosity, cheers!

Click to expand...

Can you return it?

Perhaps sell it and tey another one?

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply. The more I look at the images, the more I wonder if it's actually very good my copy at 400mm, perhaps I expected too much. What do you think of the samples I posted above versus your experience? About right?

As i've also noticed it can hit or miss. Some shots can be super sharp from a burst, others not. I wonder if the OS is a little unreliable. Or perhaps, does the OS fight me at higher shutter speeds?

Ad12 said:

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

Hello

I hear about copy variation often, but I was never sure the extent. I had a sigma 150-600C on Canon EF mount adapted to my Fuji XT3. The lens at 600mm was quite poor. When I moved to a Nikon Z6 i got an F mount copy of the same lens and it was notably better at 600mm. I attributed this to 600mm being easier to handhold on FF than crop due to the crop factor needing higher shutter speeds, and possibly the Fuji X Trans issues.

However, i am currently trialling a sigma 100-400 on my Z6 and the 400mm performance disappointed me a little. Stopping down to f/8 helps, but it's not as good as 300mm on the 70-300 AFP I am also trialling, which I can then crop.

Click to expand...

Interesting. I also found my AF-P 70- 300mm lens quite shart at 300mm. First on my D3400...then D7500...and now Z 50.

Ad12 said:

This makes me wonder if indeed I did stumble across a sharp copy of the 150-600C this time compared to last time and the variation is noticeable without pixel zooming. I feel it is. Often people are criticised for worrying about sharpness too much, which is fair, but I'm thinking it's a genuine issue this variation.

Click to expand...

Could be. I think so...as my Sigma 100-400mm lens is also sharp at 400mm as my Z 50-250 and AF-P 70- 300mm are at the telephoto end.

Even AF is better.

I shoot my Sigma wide open as is seems sharp without stepping down.

Here is a few examples:







BTW .. I bought mine used on Ebay

Ad12 said:

What extent have you guys experienced variation in the same lens, and how common do you think it is in third party zooms versus OEM?

How can we minimise this impact?

Click to expand...

Dont know

Ad12 said:

Are the more expensive professional lenses held to a higher QC level and copy variation eliminated?

Just a curiosity, cheers!

Click to expand...

Can you return it?

Perhaps sell it and tey another one?

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply.

Click to expand...

Your welcome.

Ad12 said:

The more I look at the images, the more I wonder if it's actually very good my copy at 400mm, perhaps I expected too much. What do you think of the samples I posted above versus your experience? About right?

Click to expand...

Looking on my cellphone ( at work now) they seem detailed enough.

Ad12 said:

As i've also noticed it can hit or miss. Some shots can be super sharp from a burst, others not. I wonder if the OS is a little unreliable. Or perhaps, does the OS fight me at higher shutter speeds?

Click to expand...

Could be the OS. I read that newer firmware version had improved this. Some use the USB dock...but I didnt get it yet.



When Im shooting Wildlife ( especially BIF) I turn the OS off.

At 1,000 or faster shutter speeds....is there any need for OS?

Using APS-C ...I get 600mm equiv...still no need for the OS at said shutter speeds.

Try some shots without it...it could be the reason for some shots being not well focused in a burst.



ANAYV

Ad12 said:

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

Hello

I hear about copy variation often, but I was never sure the extent. I had a sigma 150-600C on Canon EF mount adapted to my Fuji XT3. The lens at 600mm was quite poor. When I moved to a Nikon Z6 i got an F mount copy of the same lens and it was notably better at 600mm. I attributed this to 600mm being easier to handhold on FF than crop due to the crop factor needing higher shutter speeds, and possibly the Fuji X Trans issues.

However, i am currently trialling a sigma 100-400 on my Z6 and the 400mm performance disappointed me a little. Stopping down to f/8 helps, but it's not as good as 300mm on the 70-300 AFP I am also trialling, which I can then crop.

Click to expand...

Interesting. I also found my AF-P 70- 300mm lens quite shart at 300mm. First on my D3400...then D7500...and now Z 50.

Ad12 said:

This makes me wonder if indeed I did stumble across a sharp copy of the 150-600C this time compared to last time and the variation is noticeable without pixel zooming. I feel it is. Often people are criticised for worrying about sharpness too much, which is fair, but I'm thinking it's a genuine issue this variation.

Click to expand...

Could be. I think so...as my Sigma 100-400mm lens is also sharp at 400mm as my Z 50-250 and AF-P 70- 300mm are at the telephoto end.

Even AF is better.

I shoot my Sigma wide open as is seems sharp without stepping down.

Here is a few examples:







BTW .. I bought mine used on Ebay

Ad12 said:

What extent have you guys experienced variation in the same lens, and how common do you think it is in third party zooms versus OEM?

How can we minimise this impact?

Click to expand...

Dont know

Ad12 said:

Are the more expensive professional lenses held to a higher QC level and copy variation eliminated?

Just a curiosity, cheers!

Click to expand...

Can you return it?

Perhaps sell it and tey another one?

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply. The more I look at the images, the more I wonder if it's actually very good my copy at 400mm, perhaps I expected too much. What do you think of the samples I posted above versus your experience? About right?

As i've also noticed it can hit or miss. Some shots can be super sharp from a burst, others not. I wonder if the OS is a little unreliable. Or perhaps, does the OS fight me at higher shutter speeds?

Click to expand...

Never shoot bursts with my DX and FX cameras!

--
tordseriksson (at) gmail.....
Owner of a handful of Nikon cameras. And a few lenses.
WSSA #456

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

Hello

I hear about copy variation often, but I was never sure the extent. I had a sigma 150-600C on Canon EF mount adapted to my Fuji XT3. The lens at 600mm was quite poor. When I moved to a Nikon Z6 i got an F mount copy of the same lens and it was notably better at 600mm. I attributed this to 600mm being easier to handhold on FF than crop due to the crop factor needing higher shutter speeds, and possibly the Fuji X Trans issues.

However, i am currently trialling a sigma 100-400 on my Z6 and the 400mm performance disappointed me a little. Stopping down to f/8 helps, but it's not as good as 300mm on the 70-300 AFP I am also trialling, which I can then crop.

Click to expand...

Interesting. I also found my AF-P 70- 300mm lens quite shart at 300mm. First on my D3400...then D7500...and now Z 50.

ANAYV said:

This makes me wonder if indeed I did stumble across a sharp copy of the 150-600C this time compared to last time and the variation is noticeable without pixel zooming. I feel it is. Often people are criticised for worrying about sharpness too much, which is fair, but I'm thinking it's a genuine issue this variation.

Click to expand...

Could be. I think so...as my Sigma 100-400mm lens is also sharp at 400mm as my Z 50-250 and AF-P 70- 300mm are at the telephoto end.

Even AF is better.

I shoot my Sigma wide open as is seems sharp without stepping down.

Here is a few examples:







BTW .. I bought mine used on Ebay

ANAYV said:

What extent have you guys experienced variation in the same lens, and how common do you think it is in third party zooms versus OEM?

How can we minimise this impact?

Click to expand...

Dont know

ANAYV said:

Are the more expensive professional lenses held to a higher QC level and copy variation eliminated?

Just a curiosity, cheers!

Click to expand...

Can you return it?

Perhaps sell it and tey another one?

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply.

Click to expand...

Your welcome.

ANAYV said:

The more I look at the images, the more I wonder if it's actually very good my copy at 400mm, perhaps I expected too much. What do you think of the samples I posted above versus your experience? About right?

Click to expand...

Looking on my cellphone ( at work now) they seem detailed enough.

ANAYV said:

As i've also noticed it can hit or miss. Some shots can be super sharp from a burst, others not. I wonder if the OS is a little unreliable. Or perhaps, does the OS fight me at higher shutter speeds?

Click to expand...

Could be the OS. I read that newer firmware version had improved this. Some use the USB dock...but I didnt get it yet.

When Im shooting Wildlife ( especially BIF) I turn the OS off.

At 1,000 or faster shutter speeds....is there any need for OS?

Using APS-C ...I get 600mm equiv...still no need for the OS at said shutter speeds.

Try some shots without it...it could be the reason for some shots being not well focused in a burst.

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Good advice!

--
tordseriksson (at) gmail.....
Owner of a handful of Nikon cameras. And a few lenses.
WSSA #456

Tord S Eriksson said:

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

Hello

I hear about copy variation often, but I was never sure the extent. I had a sigma 150-600C on Canon EF mount adapted to my Fuji XT3. The lens at 600mm was quite poor. When I moved to a Nikon Z6 i got an F mount copy of the same lens and it was notably better at 600mm. I attributed this to 600mm being easier to handhold on FF than crop due to the crop factor needing higher shutter speeds, and possibly the Fuji X Trans issues.

However, i am currently trialling a sigma 100-400 on my Z6 and the 400mm performance disappointed me a little. Stopping down to f/8 helps, but it's not as good as 300mm on the 70-300 AFP I am also trialling, which I can then crop.

Click to expand...

Interesting. I also found my AF-P 70- 300mm lens quite shart at 300mm. First on my D3400...then D7500...and now Z 50.

Tord S Eriksson said:

This makes me wonder if indeed I did stumble across a sharp copy of the 150-600C this time compared to last time and the variation is noticeable without pixel zooming. I feel it is. Often people are criticised for worrying about sharpness too much, which is fair, but I'm thinking it's a genuine issue this variation.

Click to expand...

Could be. I think so...as my Sigma 100-400mm lens is also sharp at 400mm as my Z 50-250 and AF-P 70- 300mm are at the telephoto end.

Even AF is better.

I shoot my Sigma wide open as is seems sharp without stepping down.

Here is a few examples:







BTW .. I bought mine used on Ebay

Tord S Eriksson said:

What extent have you guys experienced variation in the same lens, and how common do you think it is in third party zooms versus OEM?

How can we minimise this impact?

Click to expand...

Dont know

Tord S Eriksson said:

Are the more expensive professional lenses held to a higher QC level and copy variation eliminated?

Just a curiosity, cheers!

Click to expand...

Can you return it?

Perhaps sell it and tey another one?

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply.

Click to expand...

Your welcome.

Tord S Eriksson said:

The more I look at the images, the more I wonder if it's actually very good my copy at 400mm, perhaps I expected too much. What do you think of the samples I posted above versus your experience? About right?

Click to expand...

Looking on my cellphone ( at work now) they seem detailed enough.

Tord S Eriksson said:

As i've also noticed it can hit or miss. Some shots can be super sharp from a burst, others not. I wonder if the OS is a little unreliable. Or perhaps, does the OS fight me at higher shutter speeds?

Click to expand...

Could be the OS. I read that newer firmware version had improved this. Some use the USB dock...but I didnt get it yet.

When Im shooting Wildlife ( especially BIF) I turn the OS off.

At 1,000 or faster shutter speeds....is there any need for OS?

Using APS-C ...I get 600mm equiv...still no need for the OS at said shutter speeds.

Try some shots without it...it could be the reason for some shots being not well focused in a burst.

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Good advice!

Click to expand...

Hope all is well , Tord

ANAYV

ANAYV said:

Tord S Eriksson said:

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

Hello

I hear about copy variation often, but I was never sure the extent. I had a sigma 150-600C on Canon EF mount adapted to my Fuji XT3. The lens at 600mm was quite poor. When I moved to a Nikon Z6 i got an F mount copy of the same lens and it was notably better at 600mm. I attributed this to 600mm being easier to handhold on FF than crop due to the crop factor needing higher shutter speeds, and possibly the Fuji X Trans issues.

However, i am currently trialling a sigma 100-400 on my Z6 and the 400mm performance disappointed me a little. Stopping down to f/8 helps, but it's not as good as 300mm on the 70-300 AFP I am also trialling, which I can then crop.

Click to expand...

Interesting. I also found my AF-P 70- 300mm lens quite shart at 300mm. First on my D3400...then D7500...and now Z 50.

ANAYV said:

This makes me wonder if indeed I did stumble across a sharp copy of the 150-600C this time compared to last time and the variation is noticeable without pixel zooming. I feel it is. Often people are criticised for worrying about sharpness too much, which is fair, but I'm thinking it's a genuine issue this variation.

Click to expand...

Could be. I think so...as my Sigma 100-400mm lens is also sharp at 400mm as my Z 50-250 and AF-P 70- 300mm are at the telephoto end.

Even AF is better.

I shoot my Sigma wide open as is seems sharp without stepping down.

Here is a few examples:







BTW .. I bought mine used on Ebay

ANAYV said:

What extent have you guys experienced variation in the same lens, and how common do you think it is in third party zooms versus OEM?

How can we minimise this impact?

Click to expand...

Dont know

ANAYV said:

Are the more expensive professional lenses held to a higher QC level and copy variation eliminated?

Just a curiosity, cheers!

Click to expand...

Can you return it?

Perhaps sell it and tey another one?

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply.

Click to expand...

Your welcome.

ANAYV said:

The more I look at the images, the more I wonder if it's actually very good my copy at 400mm, perhaps I expected too much. What do you think of the samples I posted above versus your experience? About right?

Click to expand...

Looking on my cellphone ( at work now) they seem detailed enough.

ANAYV said:

As i've also noticed it can hit or miss. Some shots can be super sharp from a burst, others not. I wonder if the OS is a little unreliable. Or perhaps, does the OS fight me at higher shutter speeds?

Click to expand...

Could be the OS. I read that newer firmware version had improved this. Some use the USB dock...but I didnt get it yet.

When Im shooting Wildlife ( especially BIF) I turn the OS off.

At 1,000 or faster shutter speeds....is there any need for OS?

Using APS-C ...I get 600mm equiv...still no need for the OS at said shutter speeds.

Try some shots without it...it could be the reason for some shots being not well focused in a burst.

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Good advice!

Click to expand...

Hope all is well , Tord

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Just got a notice that the doctor wants to see me, and he urges me to bring a family member ... I guess he has the answer from the lab. Well, c'est la vie!

--
tordseriksson (at) gmail.....
Owner of a handful of Nikon cameras. And a few lenses.
WSSA #456

Tord S Eriksson said:

ANAYV said:

Tord S Eriksson said:

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

Hello

I hear about copy variation often, but I was never sure the extent. I had a sigma 150-600C on Canon EF mount adapted to my Fuji XT3. The lens at 600mm was quite poor. When I moved to a Nikon Z6 i got an F mount copy of the same lens and it was notably better at 600mm. I attributed this to 600mm being easier to handhold on FF than crop due to the crop factor needing higher shutter speeds, and possibly the Fuji X Trans issues.

However, i am currently trialling a sigma 100-400 on my Z6 and the 400mm performance disappointed me a little. Stopping down to f/8 helps, but it's not as good as 300mm on the 70-300 AFP I am also trialling, which I can then crop.

Click to expand...

Interesting. I also found my AF-P 70- 300mm lens quite shart at 300mm. First on my D3400...then D7500...and now Z 50.

Tord S Eriksson said:

This makes me wonder if indeed I did stumble across a sharp copy of the 150-600C this time compared to last time and the variation is noticeable without pixel zooming. I feel it is. Often people are criticised for worrying about sharpness too much, which is fair, but I'm thinking it's a genuine issue this variation.

Click to expand...

Could be. I think so...as my Sigma 100-400mm lens is also sharp at 400mm as my Z 50-250 and AF-P 70- 300mm are at the telephoto end.

Even AF is better.

I shoot my Sigma wide open as is seems sharp without stepping down.

Here is a few examples:







BTW .. I bought mine used on Ebay

Tord S Eriksson said:

What extent have you guys experienced variation in the same lens, and how common do you think it is in third party zooms versus OEM?

How can we minimise this impact?

Click to expand...

Dont know

Tord S Eriksson said:

Are the more expensive professional lenses held to a higher QC level and copy variation eliminated?

Just a curiosity, cheers!

Click to expand...

Can you return it?

Perhaps sell it and tey another one?

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply.

Click to expand...

Your welcome.

Tord S Eriksson said:

The more I look at the images, the more I wonder if it's actually very good my copy at 400mm, perhaps I expected too much. What do you think of the samples I posted above versus your experience? About right?

Click to expand...

Looking on my cellphone ( at work now) they seem detailed enough.

Tord S Eriksson said:

As i've also noticed it can hit or miss. Some shots can be super sharp from a burst, others not. I wonder if the OS is a little unreliable. Or perhaps, does the OS fight me at higher shutter speeds?

Click to expand...

Could be the OS. I read that newer firmware version had improved this. Some use the USB dock...but I didnt get it yet.

When Im shooting Wildlife ( especially BIF) I turn the OS off.

At 1,000 or faster shutter speeds....is there any need for OS?

Using APS-C ...I get 600mm equiv...still no need for the OS at said shutter speeds.

Try some shots without it...it could be the reason for some shots being not well focused in a burst.

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Good advice!

Click to expand...

Hope all is well , Tord

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Just got a notice that the doctor wants to see me, and he urges me to bring a family member ... I guess he has the answer from the lab. Well, c'est la vie!

Click to expand...

Oh my...i hope everything will be OK with you, Tord.

One day at a time, best way to live, me thinks...

You are In my prayers tonight.

ANAYV

ANAYV said:

Tord S Eriksson said:

ANAYV said:

Tord S Eriksson said:

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

Hello

I hear about copy variation often, but I was never sure the extent. I had a sigma 150-600C on Canon EF mount adapted to my Fuji XT3. The lens at 600mm was quite poor. When I moved to a Nikon Z6 i got an F mount copy of the same lens and it was notably better at 600mm. I attributed this to 600mm being easier to handhold on FF than crop due to the crop factor needing higher shutter speeds, and possibly the Fuji X Trans issues.

However, i am currently trialling a sigma 100-400 on my Z6 and the 400mm performance disappointed me a little. Stopping down to f/8 helps, but it's not as good as 300mm on the 70-300 AFP I am also trialling, which I can then crop.

Click to expand...

Interesting. I also found my AF-P 70- 300mm lens quite shart at 300mm. First on my D3400...then D7500...and now Z 50.

ANAYV said:

This makes me wonder if indeed I did stumble across a sharp copy of the 150-600C this time compared to last time and the variation is noticeable without pixel zooming. I feel it is. Often people are criticised for worrying about sharpness too much, which is fair, but I'm thinking it's a genuine issue this variation.

Click to expand...

Could be. I think so...as my Sigma 100-400mm lens is also sharp at 400mm as my Z 50-250 and AF-P 70- 300mm are at the telephoto end.

Even AF is better.

I shoot my Sigma wide open as is seems sharp without stepping down.

Here is a few examples:







BTW .. I bought mine used on Ebay

ANAYV said:

What extent have you guys experienced variation in the same lens, and how common do you think it is in third party zooms versus OEM?

How can we minimise this impact?

Click to expand...

Dont know

ANAYV said:

Are the more expensive professional lenses held to a higher QC level and copy variation eliminated?

Just a curiosity, cheers!

Click to expand...

Can you return it?

Perhaps sell it and tey another one?

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply.

Click to expand...

Your welcome.

ANAYV said:

The more I look at the images, the more I wonder if it's actually very good my copy at 400mm, perhaps I expected too much. What do you think of the samples I posted above versus your experience? About right?

Click to expand...

Looking on my cellphone ( at work now) they seem detailed enough.

ANAYV said:

As i've also noticed it can hit or miss. Some shots can be super sharp from a burst, others not. I wonder if the OS is a little unreliable. Or perhaps, does the OS fight me at higher shutter speeds?

Click to expand...

Could be the OS. I read that newer firmware version had improved this. Some use the USB dock...but I didnt get it yet.

When Im shooting Wildlife ( especially BIF) I turn the OS off.

At 1,000 or faster shutter speeds....is there any need for OS?

Using APS-C ...I get 600mm equiv...still no need for the OS at said shutter speeds.

Try some shots without it...it could be the reason for some shots being not well focused in a burst.

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Good advice!

Click to expand...

Hope all is well , Tord

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Just got a notice that the doctor wants to see me, and he urges me to bring a family member ... I guess he has the answer from the lab. Well, c'est la vie!

Click to expand...

Oh my...i hope everything will be OK with you, Tord.

One day at a time, best way to live, me thinks...

You are In my prayers tonight.

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Any support is appreciated ;-)!

--
tordseriksson (at) gmail.....
Owner of a handful of Nikon cameras. And a few lenses.
WSSA #456

Tord S Eriksson said:

ANAYV said:

Tord S Eriksson said:

ANAYV said:

Tord S Eriksson said:

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

Hello

I hear about copy variation often, but I was never sure the extent. I had a sigma 150-600C on Canon EF mount adapted to my Fuji XT3. The lens at 600mm was quite poor. When I moved to a Nikon Z6 i got an F mount copy of the same lens and it was notably better at 600mm. I attributed this to 600mm being easier to handhold on FF than crop due to the crop factor needing higher shutter speeds, and possibly the Fuji X Trans issues.

However, i am currently trialling a sigma 100-400 on my Z6 and the 400mm performance disappointed me a little. Stopping down to f/8 helps, but it's not as good as 300mm on the 70-300 AFP I am also trialling, which I can then crop.

Click to expand...

Interesting. I also found my AF-P 70- 300mm lens quite shart at 300mm. First on my D3400...then D7500...and now Z 50.

Tord S Eriksson said:

This makes me wonder if indeed I did stumble across a sharp copy of the 150-600C this time compared to last time and the variation is noticeable without pixel zooming. I feel it is. Often people are criticised for worrying about sharpness too much, which is fair, but I'm thinking it's a genuine issue this variation.

Click to expand...

Could be. I think so...as my Sigma 100-400mm lens is also sharp at 400mm as my Z 50-250 and AF-P 70- 300mm are at the telephoto end.

Even AF is better.

I shoot my Sigma wide open as is seems sharp without stepping down.

Here is a few examples:







BTW .. I bought mine used on Ebay

Tord S Eriksson said:

What extent have you guys experienced variation in the same lens, and how common do you think it is in third party zooms versus OEM?

How can we minimise this impact?

Click to expand...

Dont know

Tord S Eriksson said:

Are the more expensive professional lenses held to a higher QC level and copy variation eliminated?

Just a curiosity, cheers!

Click to expand...

Can you return it?

Perhaps sell it and tey another one?

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply.

Click to expand...

Your welcome.

Tord S Eriksson said:

The more I look at the images, the more I wonder if it's actually very good my copy at 400mm, perhaps I expected too much. What do you think of the samples I posted above versus your experience? About right?

Click to expand...

Looking on my cellphone ( at work now) they seem detailed enough.

Tord S Eriksson said:

As i've also noticed it can hit or miss. Some shots can be super sharp from a burst, others not. I wonder if the OS is a little unreliable. Or perhaps, does the OS fight me at higher shutter speeds?

Click to expand...

Could be the OS. I read that newer firmware version had improved this. Some use the USB dock...but I didnt get it yet.

When Im shooting Wildlife ( especially BIF) I turn the OS off.

At 1,000 or faster shutter speeds....is there any need for OS?

Using APS-C ...I get 600mm equiv...still no need for the OS at said shutter speeds.

Try some shots without it...it could be the reason for some shots being not well focused in a burst.

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Good advice!

Click to expand...

Hope all is well , Tord

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Just got a notice that the doctor wants to see me, and he urges me to bring a family member ... I guess he has the answer from the lab. Well, c'est la vie!

Click to expand...

Oh my...i hope everything will be OK with you, Tord.

One day at a time, best way to live, me thinks...

You are In my prayers tonight.

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Any support is appreciated ;-)!

Click to expand...

Hello. I don’t know the details of course, but all the best in whatever is troubling you! And thanks for the assistance in my camera related decision making, very much appreciated!

Ad12 said:

Tord S Eriksson said:

ANAYV said:

Tord S Eriksson said:

ANAYV said:

Tord S Eriksson said:

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

ANAYV said:

Ad12 said:

Hello

I hear about copy variation often, but I was never sure the extent. I had a sigma 150-600C on Canon EF mount adapted to my Fuji XT3. The lens at 600mm was quite poor. When I moved to a Nikon Z6 i got an F mount copy of the same lens and it was notably better at 600mm. I attributed this to 600mm being easier to handhold on FF than crop due to the crop factor needing higher shutter speeds, and possibly the Fuji X Trans issues.

However, i am currently trialling a sigma 100-400 on my Z6 and the 400mm performance disappointed me a little. Stopping down to f/8 helps, but it's not as good as 300mm on the 70-300 AFP I am also trialling, which I can then crop.

Click to expand...

Interesting. I also found my AF-P 70- 300mm lens quite shart at 300mm. First on my D3400...then D7500...and now Z 50.

Ad12 said:

This makes me wonder if indeed I did stumble across a sharp copy of the 150-600C this time compared to last time and the variation is noticeable without pixel zooming. I feel it is. Often people are criticised for worrying about sharpness too much, which is fair, but I'm thinking it's a genuine issue this variation.

Click to expand...

Could be. I think so...as my Sigma 100-400mm lens is also sharp at 400mm as my Z 50-250 and AF-P 70- 300mm are at the telephoto end.

Even AF is better.

I shoot my Sigma wide open as is seems sharp without stepping down.

Here is a few examples:







BTW .. I bought mine used on Ebay

Ad12 said:

What extent have you guys experienced variation in the same lens, and how common do you think it is in third party zooms versus OEM?

How can we minimise this impact?

Click to expand...

Dont know

Ad12 said:

Are the more expensive professional lenses held to a higher QC level and copy variation eliminated?

Just a curiosity, cheers!

Click to expand...

Can you return it?

Perhaps sell it and tey another one?

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply.

Click to expand...

Your welcome.

Ad12 said:

The more I look at the images, the more I wonder if it's actually very good my copy at 400mm, perhaps I expected too much. What do you think of the samples I posted above versus your experience? About right?

Click to expand...

Looking on my cellphone ( at work now) they seem detailed enough.

Ad12 said:

As i've also noticed it can hit or miss. Some shots can be super sharp from a burst, others not. I wonder if the OS is a little unreliable. Or perhaps, does the OS fight me at higher shutter speeds?

Click to expand...

Could be the OS. I read that newer firmware version had improved this. Some use the USB dock...but I didnt get it yet.

When Im shooting Wildlife ( especially BIF) I turn the OS off.

At 1,000 or faster shutter speeds....is there any need for OS?

Using APS-C ...I get 600mm equiv...still no need for the OS at said shutter speeds.

Try some shots without it...it could be the reason for some shots being not well focused in a burst.

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Good advice!

Click to expand...

Hope all is well , Tord

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Just got a notice that the doctor wants to see me, and he urges me to bring a family member ... I guess he has the answer from the lab. Well, c'est la vie!

Click to expand...

Oh my...i hope everything will be OK with you, Tord.

One day at a time, best way to live, me thinks...

You are In my prayers tonight.

ANAYV

Click to expand...

Any support is appreciated ;-)!

Click to expand...

Hello. I don’t know the details of course, but all the best in whatever is troubling you! And thanks for the assistance in my camera related decision making, very much appreciated!

Click to expand...

Just doing my best — life is not always as simple as one would want it to be. I guess it will be chemotherapy, that I need, but I don't know as yet.

I love to give advice about things I have knowledge about and avoid giving advice about lenses I have never used or never owned.

--

tordseriksson (at) gmail.....
Owner of a handful of Nikon cameras. And a few lenses.
WSSA #456