Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 OS DG image quality

[Scottelly]

Until today I was pretty impressed with this lens. Today I shot some "test" photos, which indicate to me that it is not a particularly good performer (as far as image detail at long focal lengths, where a long zoom is likely to be used most often). I have to do some more testing, but the lens does indeed seem to be one that I need to replace. I'm hoping Sigma makes a new 70-300mm f3.5-5.6 OS DG HSM C to replace this lens, because I really do like the focal length range of this lens. Here is a pair of photos I shot at 300mm, and one at 70mm. All were made with the aperture stopped down some:


Sigma SD1 Merrill w/ 70-300mm f4-5.6 OS DG set to 300mm f8 1/400 ISO 100

At first glance the image may look good, but when you zoom into 100% you see lots of blur. The distant sign is not readable, and the vertical bars of the railings are not sharp, as would be expected of a really good lens. With most organic subjects this has not been so visible for me, though I would expect that squirrel photo I made to show the lack of detail more than it did.

Here's a crop of that squirrel shot from another thread:


Sigma SD1 Merrill w/ 70-300mm f4-5.6 OS DG set to 300mm f8 1/400 ISO 200


Sigma SD1 Merrill w/ 70-300mm f4-5.6 OS DG set to 70mm f7.1 1/160 ISO 100

So this photo would likely look better if I shot it from a tripod with my 70mm f2.8 EX Macro, but this looks pretty decent. I think it's the 300mm focal length that is the weak focal length of this lens, though 70mm isn't supposed to be as good as the middling focal lengths. That's fine with me, because I have a 70mm prime (the 70mm f2.8 EX Macro).

Just so you know, I shot all these photos here handheld with OS, and they have ALL been sharpened to some extent - mostly with my standard level 33 sharpening in GIMP with least noise reduction (lowest settings in SPP and no noise reduction in GIMP), after exporting from raw in Landscape color mode, with some X3F Fill Light and other exposure adjustments, or just with a -0.5 sharpness in SPP 6.4.0. To stop the sky in the last shot above from looking noisey, I used layers and sharpened everything except the majority of the sky. I could have done the same using a mask, but that's just not how I do it.

I haven't tested this lens much at 135mm and f8, where it's supposed to be sharpest. You can bet that I'll be doing that later, but at over 3,000 lines of picture height resolution (according to one test), I'd say it's pretty good at that middling focal length. Here's a shot I made at 180mm:


Sigma SD1 Merrill w/ 70-300mm f4-5.6 OS DG set to 180mm f7.1 1/250 ISO 100

As you can see, those leaves and berries are looking pretty good (the ones that are in focus), though it's more difficult to tell how good, compared to the distant building shot, because there are no distant road signs to read (or not be able to read), and organic things have a tendency to look pretty detailed even when they aren't (at least that's my experience). Here's a different shot at 110mm and one at a longer focal length . . . all straight out of SPP 6.4.0 with -0.5 sharpness, Landscape color mode, lowest noise reduction, and some X3F Fill Light, with no editing in GIMP:


Sigma SD1 Merrill w/ 70-300mm f4-5.6 OS DG set to 110mm f7.1 1/160 ISO 100


Sigma SD1 Merrill w/ 70-300mm f4-5.6 OS DG set to 160mm f8 1/250 ISO 100

Here is a couple reviews of this lens, which basically match my experience with it:

Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG OS Interchangeable Lens Review

Expert review of the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG OS interchangeable lens

www.ephotozine.com

Sigma AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG OS (FX) - Review / Test Report

Sigma AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG OS FX Review

www.photozone.de

--
Scott Barton Kennelly

http://www.bigprintphotos.com

 

[Iconoscope]

A factor often overlooked when shooting distant scenes is atmospheric turbulence. Turbulence is particularly bad from about 2 hours after sunrise until about an hour before sunset, especially in the summer months. An overcast sky tends to reduce this turbulence. I live in New Mexico where the heat waves rising from the ground makes distant shots near impossible!

 

[docmaas]

Maybe an art series lens to compete with this: https://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/lenses/canon_70-300_4-5p6l_is

I'd really like to see them do something more in the 35-100 range as an art full frame lens as well. The 14-105 just doesn't seem to quite cut it as an art lens from what I've seen.

 

[Scottelly]

Maybe an art series lens to compete with this: https://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/lenses/canon_70-300_4-5p6l_is

I'd really like to see them do something more in the 35-100 range as an art full frame lens as well. The 14-105 just doesn't seem to quite cut it as an art lens from what I've seen.

 

[Scottelly]

Here's another couple of photos of that squirrel and a bee:


Sigma SD1 Merrill w/ 70-300mm f4-5.6 OS DG set to 200mm f11 1/160 ISO 800




Sigma SD1 Merrill w/ 70-300mm f4-5.6 OS DG set to 300mm f11 1/800 ISO 800

I processed these quickly in GIMP (including cropping the bee shot drastically), after exporting to jpeg from raw with some adjustments in SPP 6.4.0 (noise reduction set to default, due to the ISO 800 setting I used when shooting).

--
Scott Barton Kennelly

http://www.bigprintphotos.com

 

[rick decker]

300 looks soft on the building with the balconies but your series of shots have been done well and look very good. I don't know if that is the new or the old version. The new is supposed to be better. Either way it is very light and compact and 300 is plenty of length. Even at 200 it is a good deal but I will stay with the 100-400.

Rick

 

[Scottelly]

300 looks soft on the building with the balconies but your series of shots have been done well and look very good. I don't know if that is the new or the old version. The new is supposed to be better. Either way it is very light and compact and 300 is plenty of length. Even at 200 it is a good deal but I will stay with the 100-400.

Rick

 

[Scottelly]

O.K. I went back to that bridge and shot with my tripod. I used 10 second self-timer mode (sorry, but mirror up was not an option - no remote trigger). Here are two shots - the first at 300mm and the second at 200mm. Both were at f11. I picked the best of a few shots I made at each focal length. You decide if I should still shoot at 300mm or tick to 200mm.


SD1 Merrill w/ 70-300mm f4-5.6 OS DG set to 300mm f11 1/500 ISO 200


SD1 Merrill w/ 70-300mm f4-5.6 OS DG set to 200mm f11 1/250 ISO 100



You may notice that the second image (shot at 200mm) was shot with a slower shutter speed at ISO 100. I guess I only switched up to ISO 200 when I decided to shoot at 300mm. I did this in an attempt to reduce motion blur. Maybe I should have done this with the 200mm shot too. I did find that focus was so critical, as it always it. It seems that between all the shots I made - more than a dozen - some were slightly front focused. I'm sure I could have focused a little better. I guess it's time for a viewfinder magnifier.



Suffice it to say, I think this lens is better than I thought after that first series of photos that I shot handheld. You REALLY can't tell how sharp a lens is, if you're shooting it handheld . . . especially not a 300mm lens.

--
Scott Barton Kennelly

http://www.bigprintphotos.com

 

[xpatUSA]

O.K. I went back to that bridge and shot with my tripod. I used 10 second self-timer mode (sorry, but mirror up was not an option - no remote trigger). Here are two shots - the first at 300mm and the second at 200mm. Both were at f11. I picked the best of a few shots I made at each focal length. You decide if I should still shoot at 300mm or stick to 200mm.

Five comparisons in FastStone on my WUXGA monitor:

Both 100% - hard to say.

200mm 150% Nearest Neighbor - 300mm better

200mm 150% Lanczos3 - 300mm better

300mm 75% Nearest Neighbor - 200mm better*

300mm 75% Lanczos3 - 200mm better*

*the downsizing of the 300mm image put moire on the balcony railings.

Since you're into "detail" and printing large, either one should work when you're going to be upsizing for the final image - meaning that the choice should be by angle of view, not acutance.

 

[Scottelly]

O.K. I went back to that bridge and shot with my tripod. I used 10 second self-timer mode (sorry, but mirror up was not an option - no remote trigger). Here are two shots - the first at 300mm and the second at 200mm. Both were at f11. I picked the best of a few shots I made at each focal length. You decide if I should still shoot at 300mm or stick to 200mm.

Five comparisons in FastStone on my WUXGA monitor:

Both 100% - hard to say.

200mm 150% Nearest Neighbor - 300mm better

200mm 150% Lanczos3 - 300mm better

300mm 75% Nearest Neighbor - 200mm better*

300mm 75% Lanczos3 - 200mm better*

*the downsizing of the 300mm image put moire on the balcony railings.

Since you're into "detail" and printing large, either one should work when you're going to be upsizing for the final image - meaning that the choice should be by angle of view, not acutance.

 

[D Cox]

Are you using auto focus or manual focus (with magnify) ? I have seen a number of complaints from SD1M users that the auto focus was not perfectly accurate.

I think testing needs to be more rigorous than ordinary shooting. It would be best to switch off OS and put the lens on a good tripod for testing it at 300mm. Using delayed action or cable release too.

300mm on APS-C is quite long and needs great care to get best results.

I hope I haven't annoyed you by stating the obvious.

 

[xpatUSA]

O.K. I went back to that bridge and shot with my tripod. I used 10 second self-timer mode (sorry, but mirror up was not an option - no remote trigger). Here are two shots - the first at 300mm and the second at 200mm. Both were at f11. I picked the best of a few shots I made at each focal length. You decide if I should still shoot at 300mm or stick to 200mm.

Five comparisons in FastStone on my WUXGA monitor:

Both 100% - hard to say.

200mm 150% Nearest Neighbor - 300mm better

200mm 150% Lanczos3 - 300mm better

300mm 75% Nearest Neighbor - 200mm better*

300mm 75% Lanczos3 - 200mm better*

*the downsizing of the 300mm image put moire on the balcony railings.

Since you're into "detail" and printing large, either one should work when you're going to be upsizing for the final image - meaning that the choice should be by angle of view, not acutance.

--
"What we've got hyah is Failyah to Communicate": 'Cool Hand Luke' 1967.

Thanks for that Ted.

BTW, I'm a little surprised nobody noticed with the first photo I posted in this thread of that building that the lens should have been performing better at 300mm. I'm going to have to go back there and shoot some f8 shots at 300mm, because these were at f11. It was an attempt to get better image quality, and I had read in the reviews that f11 gave best resolution.

LensTip does indeed agree with f/11 at 300mm for best MTF50:

http://www.lenstip.com/231.4-Lens_review-Sigma_70-300_mm_f_4-5.6_DG_OS_Image_resolution.html

At f/11 on your SD1M in high-res mode, diffraction is beginning to appear with any lens, but softening due to that is easily recoverable to a great extent with your favorite pencil-sharpener.

How's the barrel firmness on yours at 300mm? Mine's not that good . . :-(

--
"What we've got hyah is Failyah to Communicate": 'Cool Hand Luke' 1967.

 

[Scottelly]

Are you using auto focus or manual focus (with magnify) ? I have seen a number of complaints from SD1M users that the auto focus was not perfectly accurate.

I think testing needs to be more rigorous than ordinary shooting. It would be best to switch off OS and put the lens on a good tripod for testing it at 300mm. Using delayed action or cable release too.

300mm on APS-C is quite long and needs great care to get best results.

I hope I haven't annoyed you by stating the obvious.

You are correct, which is basically what I was pointing out earlier. Those last shots at f11 were actually from a sturdy tripod, with 10 sec. self-timer, using manual focus, with OS turned off. The first shot that I posted originally though, was a handheld shot made with OS on and auto-focus. I guess this is sort of a good demonstration that even in bright sunlight, using high shutter speeds (1/400 if I remember correctly), you can't handhold a 300mm shot, even with OS. Funny though, ALL of the shots other than the recent shots of the building down the canal were handheld, including the shots of the bee and other things at long focal lengths, so for practical purposes, the OS is pretty useful. For critical work though, turning off OS and shooting from a tripod or other sturdy mount, using manual focus and focus bracketing is a smart idea.

I went and shot a series, which I'm working on right now. Here is the best shot I made at f8:


Sigma SD1 Merrill w/ 70-300mm f4-5.6 set to 300mm f8 1/500 ISO 100

Here is the best shot at f14:


Sigma SD1 Merrill w/ 70-300mm f4-5.6 set to 300mm f14 1/160 ISO 100

These were exported from SPP 6.4.0 with lowest noise reduction and sharpness settings in Landscape color mode, and then sharpened in GIMP. I know you might say it doesn't make sense to save as a jpeg and then sharpen that jpeg and save as a jpeg again, but that's how I've done it. Sorry.

One thing I was surprised at is how different the focus plane was with even the slightest change in the focus ring. I mean all of these were shot at infinity, but slight changes in the infinity focus position made a huge difference. Most of these were just about exactly in the middle of the infinity mark, but if I moved the focus ring just 1 millimeter the photo would be focused on something much closer, and I'm not talking about something a few feet closer, but a few yards. It would be VERY difficult to shoot photos of distant animals on the Serengeti with this lens. I'm wishing Sigma had made this lens with an almost complete turn of the focus ring, in order to focus from the closest focus to infinity. As it is, the focus ring only turns about 1/4 turn from closest focus to far past infinity. (It turns about 1/4 inch past infinity.)

Another thing that surprised me was how good a photo shot at f6.3 can look with this lens, which is supposed to be best at f11. Here's the best one I shot at f6.3:


Sigma SD1 Merrill w/ 70-300mm f4-5.6 set to 300mm f6.3 1/800 ISO 100

Notice the word GARMIN on the radar bar on top of the boat on the left is blurred some, but the distant chairs are sharp, indicating the depth of field is pretty shallow. Those chairs are about half way from the middle of the photo, but they still look pretty clear and detailed to me.

When I shot these samples, I made three photos at each of five focus bracket positions and picked the most detailed photo to process in GIMP (yes, they are sharpened a bit).

--
Scott Barton Kennelly

http://www.bigprintphotos.com

 

[Scottelly]

O.K. I went back to that bridge and shot with my tripod. I used 10 second self-timer mode (sorry, but mirror up was not an option - no remote trigger). Here are two shots - the first at 300mm and the second at 200mm. Both were at f11. I picked the best of a few shots I made at each focal length. You decide if I should still shoot at 300mm or stick to 200mm.

Five comparisons in FastStone on my WUXGA monitor:

Both 100% - hard to say.

200mm 150% Nearest Neighbor - 300mm better

200mm 150% Lanczos3 - 300mm better

300mm 75% Nearest Neighbor - 200mm better*

300mm 75% Lanczos3 - 200mm better*

*the downsizing of the 300mm image put moire on the balcony railings.

Since you're into "detail" and printing large, either one should work when you're going to be upsizing for the final image - meaning that the choice should be by angle of view, not acutance.

 

[xpatUSA]

Are you using auto focus or manual focus (with magnify) ? I have seen a number of complaints from SD1M users that the auto focus was not perfectly accurate.

He used manual focus according to ExifToolGUI. The SD1M has no "magnify" mode.

To keep us guessing he used 'Mirror Up' one one shot and the 2-sec timer on the other.

 

[xpatUSA]

10310977 is the serial number. Is that before yours or after Ted?

Can't read mine, Scott. The window is abraded.

 

[Scottelly]

Are you using auto focus or manual focus (with magnify) ? I have seen a number of complaints from SD1M users that the auto focus was not perfectly accurate.

He used manual focus according to ExifToolGUI. The SD1M has no "magnify" mode.

To keep us guessing he used 'Mirror Up' one one shot and the 2-sec timer on the other.

 

[Scottelly]

10310977 is the serial number. Is that before yours or after Ted?

Can't read mine, Scott. The window is abraded.

 

[xpatUSA]

All of my latest shots were made with 10 second self-timer mode.

Getting a little tired of this, Scott.

Your last sentence almost implies that I don't know how to read EXIF!

So let's clarify matters:

I was referring to these two shots at f/11.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59930510



Please comment.

--
"What we've got hyah is Failyah to Communicate": 'Cool Hand Luke' 1967.

 

[Scottelly]

All of my latest shots were made with 10 second self-timer mode.

Getting a little tired of this, Scott.

Your last sentence almost implies that I don't know how to read EXIF!

So let's clarify matters:

I was referring to these two shots at f/11.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59930510



Please comment.

--
"What we've got hyah is Failyah to Communicate": 'Cool Hand Luke' 1967.

Yes, but those were not my latest shots Ted. I went out after shooting the series you were looking at, and made the photos in this post:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59931452

Sorry for the confusion Ted.

--
Scott Barton Kennelly

http://www.bigprintphotos.com