bought a Sigma 100-400

Started 9 months ago | Discussions
ANAYV Forum Pro • Posts: 23,241
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400

Paul Pasco wrote:

Your shots look really nice, particularly the last.

thanks.

Maybe this would be a good option for me.

It is an option.

Most likely will not AF as fast as the Z lens, nor any weather sealing..but there are plenty of folks using this  (and the Tamron 100-400) with good results.

Plus the price. I only paid $475 for this, in mint condition.

ANAYV

Paul Pasco
Paul Pasco Veteran Member • Posts: 9,390
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400

ANAYV wrote:

Paul Pasco wrote:

Your shots look really nice, particularly the last.

thanks.

Maybe this would be a good option for me.

It is an option.

Most likely will not AF as fast as the Z lens, nor any weather sealing..but there are plenty of folks using this (and the Tamron 100-400) with good results.

Plus the price. I only paid $475 for this, in mint condition.

ANAYV

That’s a nice price, I’m seeing some on mpb.com for $569.00 which is a lot less than new but I have to decide if the extra 100mm is worth it over my good 70-300 afp. Or, do I jump up to a used 200-500? I will use it with my V1s also.

-- hide signature --

Regards, Paul
Lili's Dad
WSSA Member #450

 Paul Pasco's gear list:Paul Pasco's gear list
Nikon Z50 Nikon D50 Nikon D3 Nikon D300 Nikon 1 V1 +26 more
JNo Regular Member • Posts: 418
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400

i had the sigma 100-400 dg dn for e mount via tze-01. very very sharp, but unfortunately it stopped working after the last fw update and techart didn't fix it until today (sold it).

i also had the tamron 100-400 some years ago on my d750. af was very unreliable.

i am looking for a replacement for my nikon 200-500. you think twice if you take the this big and heavy lens with you.

since i am just a hobbyist i am not willing to pay 3K euro for the new z 100-400.

my thoughts are, either

- to get the older sigma 100-400 dg os (your version)

- get a used nikon 80-400

- keep my 200-500 until sigma or tamron are making z-mount lenses

z2122
OP z2122 Senior Member • Posts: 2,009
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400
1

JNo wrote:

i had the sigma 100-400 dg dn for e mount via tze-01. very very sharp, but unfortunately it stopped working after the last fw update and techart didn't fix it until today (sold it).

i also had the tamron 100-400 some years ago on my d750. af was very unreliable.

i am looking for a replacement for my nikon 200-500. you think twice if you take the this big and heavy lens with you.

since i am just a hobbyist i am not willing to pay 3K euro for the new z 100-400.

my thoughts are, either

- to get the older sigma 100-400 dg os (your version)

- get a used nikon 80-400

- keep my 200-500 until sigma or tamron are making z-mount lenses

I also thought about a used Nikon 80-400,  but they are not so ahqrp at 400mm. The Sigma 100-400 5.0-6,3 DG is sharper and reliable . I used it 3 years ago on my D750 and was very happy with the results (sold it later to get a 300pf)

light and sharp - that 's the reason why I bought that zoom again . And for me as an enthusiast, the IQ and AF speed is sufficient (don't need faster AF )

-- hide signature --

catch the light - explore emotions

 z2122's gear list:z2122's gear list
Nikon Z6 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm F4G ED VR Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 Nikon Z 85mm F1.8 Nikon Z 24-200mm F4-6.3 VR +10 more
JNo Regular Member • Posts: 418
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400

thank you for your response. any issues with flare/glare?

how good is vr with ibis?

z2122
OP z2122 Senior Member • Posts: 2,009
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400

JNo wrote:

thank you for your response. any issues with flare/glare?

how good is vr with ibis?

I get my lens on 4th of january and will check than how IBIS and OS is working together...

With the former 100-400 I never had any glare issues

-- hide signature --

catch the light - explore emotions

 z2122's gear list:z2122's gear list
Nikon Z6 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm F4G ED VR Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 Nikon Z 85mm F1.8 Nikon Z 24-200mm F4-6.3 VR +10 more
JNo Regular Member • Posts: 418
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400

i may have the chance to test it tomorrow and will report

Mooncusser New Member • Posts: 1
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400
1

Got my Z 100-400mm yesterday and for comparison shot it at 300mm and compared to AF-P 70-300mm at the same 300mm with the same settings on a Z6ii (Aperture set at F7.1, Auto ISO, F7.1, Z lens at 1/400sec, F lens at 1/350 sec).  At about 25 feet, took pictures of a bookshelf and the titles on the book bindings.  Looked at the images about 50% from center.  There was a bit of an overall color difference as white paint was brighter with the 100-400 lens but could not see much of a difference in resolution until I compared the pictures at 300% in Photoshop.  Very slight differences in pixel usage that were more obvious at 400% but surprisingly close.  Not a rigorous test but enough to convince me to keep the AF-P lens for when I need a lighter and smaller setup with a bit less reach.

 Mooncusser's gear list:Mooncusser's gear list
Nikon Z6 II Nikon AP-F 70-300mm F4.5-5.6E Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 Nikon Z 24-200mm F4-6.3 VR Nikon Z 100-400mm
z2122
OP z2122 Senior Member • Posts: 2,009
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400

Mooncusser wrote:

Got my Z 100-400mm yesterday and for comparison shot it at 300mm and compared to AF-P 70-300mm at the same 300mm with the same settings on a Z6ii (Aperture set at F7.1, Auto ISO, F7.1, Z lens at 1/400sec, F lens at 1/350 sec). At about 25 feet, took pictures of a bookshelf and the titles on the book bindings. Looked at the images about 50% from center. There was a bit of an overall color difference as white paint was brighter with the 100-400 lens but could not see much of a difference in resolution until I compared the pictures at 300% in Photoshop. Very slight differences in pixel usage that were more obvious at 400% but surprisingly close. Not a rigorous test but enough to convince me to keep the AF-P lens for when I need a lighter and smaller setup with a bit less reach.

I had a similar experience when testing 24-70f4, 24-70f2.8 Z and the 24-70f2.8 G version. Only when I looked at 200% I could see a significant difference on my Z6 test pictures. This is maybe different if a Z7 is used.

Which camera do you used for your test?

-- hide signature --

catch the light - explore emotions

 z2122's gear list:z2122's gear list
Nikon Z6 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm F4G ED VR Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 Nikon Z 85mm F1.8 Nikon Z 24-200mm F4-6.3 VR +10 more
JNo Regular Member • Posts: 418
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400
1

did a test against the nikon 200-500.

setup: tripod, 2 sec timer, vr off

distance to target apr. 100m

left sigma, right nikon

the sigma is too soft for me.

Davidsy New Member • Posts: 2
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400

Check the focus shift of that copy (I'm yet to find a sigma lense without it).

I don't think there are specific issues with this lense that are unique to it and that other sigma lenses don't have.

For casual use (what I understand as casual at least) everything else won't matter. If you use it for action photography, I would also check the speed of the AF drive. The sigma lenses I've use are rather slow, and I always got issues with fast moving subjects coming towards me. I don't know this lense specifically, but even the 120-300 gave me slow af. Having an idea of the limit of the lense allows you to know when you have to stop using tracking and start prefocusing (not to mention that to subjects more or less parallel to you the lense will do just fine).

Regarding the dock, there are some interesting things that you can do, but I don't know if is worth the money first hand. I've found them second hand some times very cheap, if so then yes, at the very least for firmware updates. And if you are interested, it helps to profile and correct front/back focus (although I won't consider that a concern of casual users).

Finally, get the camera you will  be using it with and check af accuracy and speed in different light conditions. Also the difference between af modes of the camera, it is possible that at a given light situation (ie dim soft light) some mode stops working properly and then you need to switch to a different one or start doing manual overdrive.

All of these you make it in a couple of evenings at home or at the closest park. If you have someone to run in front of you even easier, otherwise doves and ducks.

Cheers

earthbound_ca Senior Member • Posts: 2,343
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400
1

Not to be a Sigma apologist but, having both lenses myself, what body did you use?  Even if focus is spot on (which I can't tell from your images), 100 yds can introduce significant atmospheric disturbance that can vary significantly from one frame to another.  Also, is the Sigma a new lens or purchased used?  Finally, for now, (a) did you shoot through glass and (b) do you have the EXIF information?  (sorry, but I have done a range of comparing of my 200-500 with the 100-400 and, other than the difference in  magnification at their respective long ends, both lenses yield an impressive level of detail which, as a sign of mid-level consumer glass, can generally be enhanced with prudent use of sharpening techniques: Your Sigma image falls far short of what I would expect.)

ANAYV Forum Pro • Posts: 23,241
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400

Paul Pasco wrote:

ANAYV wrote:

Paul Pasco wrote:

Your shots look really nice, particularly the last.

thanks.

Maybe this would be a good option for me.

It is an option.

Most likely will not AF as fast as the Z lens, nor any weather sealing..but there are plenty of folks using this (and the Tamron 100-400) with good results.

Plus the price. I only paid $475 for this, in mint condition.

ANAYV

That’s a nice price,

Indeed.

I’m seeing some on mpb.com for $569.00 which is a lot less than new but I have to decide if the extra 100mm is worth it over my good 70-300 afp.

I was contemplating this for a few years now .

I was fine with the AF-P 70-300mm lens. Was also fine with the Z 50-250mm lens.

I have both, but still wanted a bit more reach...just didn't want the extra size/weight ..and the Z 100-400mm is about a pound heavier, which is too heavy for me to handhold. Even this Sigma is a bit too much for me. It fits in the camera bag, so it will come along, and I really like the I.Q. wide open.

Or, do I jump up to a used 200-500? I will use it with my V1s also.

I also considered that lens, some years ago, but that was before a rotator cuff tear on my right arm. Plus to go from 200mm to 500mm..takes a few turns of the zoom

Yikes!!

Not sure if one can Push/Pull zoom on that lens, as with the Sigma.

Then there's the Sigma 150-600mm lens

ANAYV

ANAYV Forum Pro • Posts: 23,241
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400

Davidsy wrote:

Check the focus shift of that copy (I'm yet to find a sigma lense without it).

I don't think there are specific issues with this lense that are unique to it and that other sigma lenses don't have.

For casual use (what I understand as casual at least) everything else won't matter. If you use it for action photography, I would also check the speed of the AF drive. The sigma lenses I've use are rather slow, and I always got issues with fast moving subjects coming towards me. I don't know this lense specifically, but even the 120-300 gave me slow af. Having an idea of the limit of the lense allows you to know when you have to stop using tracking and start prefocusing (not to mention that to subjects more or less parallel to you the lense will do just fine).

Regarding the dock, there are some interesting things that you can do, but I don't know if is worth the money first hand. I've found them second hand some times very cheap, if so then yes, at the very least for firmware updates. And if you are interested, it helps to profile and correct front/back focus (although I won't consider that a concern of casual users).

No need to do this for Mirrorless. AF is obtained from the sensor, not from a separate, calibrated AF sensor. No need to AF fine tune lenses , either.

This is why I haven't bought the dock yet. Really good results so far.

ANAYV

JNo Regular Member • Posts: 418
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400
1

body is a z 7 II. focus was checked manually. sigma lens was new. no shooting through glas. time between shots maybe 1 minute. no visable atmospherics to the naked eye and  i did a test also at 200mm with the same result.

earthbound_ca Senior Member • Posts: 2,343
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400
1

JNo wrote:

body is a z 7 II. focus was checked manually. sigma lens was new. no shooting through glas. time between shots maybe 1 minute. no visable atmospherics to the naked eye and i did a test also at 200mm with the same result.

That's good info.  Thank you.  Sorry for putting you on the spot: It's always chancy to post something and have it questioned (which I might do but only to a point).

Sorry to hear it's not an easy addition to your bag but I wouldn't discourage you from disabling OS, using single point small AF, etc./ keep trying as, if you can't get a better image, I will suggest that you might want to talk to your equipment dealer for support/ an exchange.  Cheers... and happy new year!

JNo Regular Member • Posts: 418
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400
1

i did other tests before like disableing os and shooting faster than 1/400 or using mf only or pin point af.

btw camera was in manual.

happy new year to you, too!:-)

earthbound_ca Senior Member • Posts: 2,343
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400

3 handheld SOOC snaps using iTTL flash (regrettably as it caused some differences in exposure... should've used manual!), 1/250, f/8 (chosen somewhat randomly as it's a common aperture to both vs f/5.6/6.3 wide open), ISO 400 at 400mm & 500mm (Nikon only).  Not a perfect comparison but, if edited and reasonably enlarged, I think the differences at 400mm would be pretty nominal:

Sigma 100-400mm OS @400mm

Nikon 200-500mm VR @400mm

Nikon 200-500mm VR @500mm

Every shooting situation is unique so I am not about to say that these results are representative of all situations but it's some indicator. (hopefully everything shows the same here as on my computer)

Cetsix Forum Member • Posts: 94
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400

Is it the new 100-400mm f/5-6.3 DG DN OS Contemporary Lens ?

JNo Regular Member • Posts: 418
Re: bought a Sigma 100-400

so maybe i just had a bad copy.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads