Nikon 100-400 compared to Sigma 100-400?

[z2122]

Since 1 year I have the Sigma 100-400 and I am using it on a Z6. So far the IQ is good, also compared to a 70-200f4G and to a 24-200Z . The center sharpness is the same , the 70-200f4G is a little bit sharper on the edges compared to the Sigma 100-400.

Now I ordered the Sigma 1401 TC and tested it. There is a very light improvement when I compare the pictures with or without TC at the same size ( object have the same size on my monitor) but this improvement is hardly noticeable in real life images. So it's easier to crop (and maybe upscale in LR) if I need more reach, than to mount the TC and I will not loose another stop of light and get quite high ISOs, because I need also to stop down the Sigma 100-400 by one stop to f8 when using the TC .. so I end up with f11. I will send the TC back.

Now my questions and maybe you can help:

• Is the IQ difference of the Nikon 100-400 noticeable compared to the Sigma 100-400 (mainly at 400mm on a Z6)?
• is the Sigma too "weak" for a Z7 sensor (Maybe i will upgrade in the future) and could this be a reason to get the Nikon 100-400?
• Is it worth to get the Nikon 1.4 Z TC when I have the Nikon 100-400 , or is the effect on the IQ low when compared to a cropped picture?
• Can I use the Nikon 100-400 with a TC wide open at 400mm and do I still get good results?

I thiught also about the new 400 4.5, but ai need the flexibility of a zoom.

--
catch the light - explore emotions

 

[Ricardo00]

Since 1 year I have the Sigma 100-400 and I am using it on a Z6. So far the IQ is good, also compared to a 70-200f4G and to a 24-200Z . The center sharpness is the same , the 70-200f4G is a little bit sharper on the edges compared to the Sigma 100-400.

Now I ordered the Sigma 1401 TC and tested it. There is a very light improvement when I compare the pictures with or without TC at the same size ( object have the same size on my monitor) but this improvement is hardly noticeable in real life images. So it's easier to crop (and maybe upscale in LR) if I need more reach, than to mount the TC and I will not loose another stop of light and get quite high ISOs, because I need also to stop down the Sigma 100-400 by one stop to f8 when using the TC .. so I end up with f11. I will send the TC back.

Now my questions and maybe you can help:

• Is the IQ difference of the Nikon 100-400 noticeable compared to the Sigma 100-400 (mainly at 400mm on a Z6)
• is the Sigma too "weak" for a Z7 sensor (Maybe i will upgrade in the future) and could this be a reason to get the Nikon 100-400
• Is it worth to get the Nikon 1.4 Z TC when I have the Nikon 100-400 , or is the effect on the IQ low when compared to a cropped picture.
• Can I use the Nikon 100-400 with a TC wide open at 400mm and do I still get good results?

Having just tested out the Z 1.4TC on the Nikon 100-400mm lens, I can only address the last two points. I was not thrilled with the sharpness of my photos when I used the TC. So I would recommend just cropping and not bothering with the 1.4TC.

As to the Sigma 100-400mm lens, I have no opinion since I have never tried this lens.

 

[z2122]

Since 1 year I have the Sigma 100-400 and I am using it on a Z6. So far the IQ is good, also compared to a 70-200f4G and to a 24-200Z . The center sharpness is the same , the 70-200f4G is a little bit sharper on the edges compared to the Sigma 100-400.

Now I ordered the Sigma 1401 TC and tested it. There is a very light improvement when I compare the pictures with or without TC at the same size ( object have the same size on my monitor) but this improvement is hardly noticeable in real life images. So it's easier to crop (and maybe upscale in LR) if I need more reach, than to mount the TC and I will not loose another stop of light and get quite high ISOs, because I need also to stop down the Sigma 100-400 by one stop to f8 when using the TC .. so I end up with f11. I will send the TC back.

Now my questions and maybe you can help:

• Is the IQ difference of the Nikon 100-400 noticeable compared to the Sigma 100-400 (mainly at 400mm on a Z6)
• is the Sigma too "weak" for a Z7 sensor (Maybe i will upgrade in the future) and could this be a reason to get the Nikon 100-400
• Is it worth to get the Nikon 1.4 Z TC when I have the Nikon 100-400 , or is the effect on the IQ low when compared to a cropped picture.
• Can I use the Nikon 100-400 with a TC wide open at 400mm and do I still get good results?

Having just tested out the Z 1.4TC on the Nikon 100-400mm lens, I can only address the last two points. I was not thrilled with the sharpness of my photos when I used the TC. So I would recommend just cropping and not bothering with the 1.4TC.

Thank you...

In the past I tested a TC 1.4III on a 300pf and came to a similar conclusion .. it was not worth to use the TC.

As to the Sigma 100-400mm lens, I have no opinion since I have never tried this lens.

 

[Ernie Misner]

Since 1 year I have the Sigma 100-400 and I am using it on a Z6. So far the IQ is good, also compared to a 70-200f4G and to a 24-200Z . The center sharpness is the same , the 70-200f4G is a little bit sharper on the edges compared to the Sigma 100-400.

Now I ordered the Sigma 1401 TC and tested it. There is a very light improvement when I compare the pictures with or without TC at the same size ( object have the same size on my monitor) but this improvement is hardly noticeable in real life images. So it's easier to crop (and maybe upscale in LR) if I need more reach, than to mount the TC and I will not loose another stop of light and get quite high ISOs, because I need also to stop down the Sigma 100-400 by one stop to f8 when using the TC .. so I end up with f11. I will send the TC back.

Now my questions and maybe you can help:

• Is the IQ difference of the Nikon 100-400 noticeable compared to the Sigma 100-400 (mainly at 400mm on a Z6)
• is the Sigma too "weak" for a Z7 sensor (Maybe i will upgrade in the future) and could this be a reason to get the Nikon 100-400
• Is it worth to get the Nikon 1.4 Z TC when I have the Nikon 100-400 , or is the effect on the IQ low when compared to a cropped picture.
• Can I use the Nikon 100-400 with a TC wide open at 400mm and do I still get good results?

Having just tested out the Z 1.4TC on the Nikon 100-400mm lens, I can only address the last two points. I was not thrilled with the sharpness of my photos when I used the TC. So I would recommend just cropping and not bothering with the 1.4TC.

Thank you...

In the past I tested a TC 1.4III on a 300pf and came to a similar conclusion .. it was not worth to use the TC.

The Z mount TC's are so much better than the F mount TC's. For example the 70-200 S with a TC 1.4 doesn't lose any visible sharpness, and I have seen great sharpness with that TC on the 100-400 as well. You cannot compare the F mount TC's to the Z mount TC's. I'm not sure why a previous poster was seeing such a loss of sharpness. The only real losses are in using a higher ISO and loss of exposure. That can be critical for sports or BIF, but on the tripod, base ISO, and stopped down a bit the results are fantastic.

As to the Sigma 100-400mm lens, I have no opinion since I have never tried this lens.

 

[areallygrumpyoldsod]

I am not in agreement with those who have struggled with image quality when using the ZTC14 on the 100-400. I find this has no impact on AF speed when shooting in good light and the image quality is great. Excellent when not using a TC, reduced to Great as a result of the loss of 1-stop of light and need to use faster shutter speeds and higher ISO.

The ZTC14 is far superior to the f-mount version. AND the ZTC20, while light years better than the F-mount version should only be used as a desperation move.

In body cropping is a choice - I prefer to leave to Lightroom.

 

[Marlin Roberts]

I am not in agreement with those who have struggled with image quality when using the ZTC14 on the 100-400. I find this has no impact on AF speed when shooting in good light and the image quality is great. Excellent when not using a TC, reduced to Great as a result of the loss of 1-stop of light and need to use faster shutter speeds and higher ISO.

The ZTC14 is far superior to the f-mount version. AND the ZTC20, while light years better than the F-mount version should only be used as a desperation move.

In body cropping is a choice - I prefer to leave to Lightroom.

So feedback on the 100-400 and 1.4TC combo runs about 2 to 1 in favor of the combo (unscientific to be sure). I suspect it all boils down to what each of us think acceptable sharpness is. I all but gave up using TCs on F-mount, but now that I have the 100-400 I think it is time to give it one last try. I usually have good light at airshows and other favorite places, so I think I should be able to overcome the loss of light. Now I just have to find one...

 

[z2122]

Since 1 year I have the Sigma 100-400 and I am using it on a Z6. So far the IQ is good, also compared to a 70-200f4G and to a 24-200Z . The center sharpness is the same , the 70-200f4G is a little bit sharper on the edges compared to the Sigma 100-400.

Now I ordered the Sigma 1401 TC and tested it. There is a very light improvement when I compare the pictures with or without TC at the same size ( object have the same size on my monitor) but this improvement is hardly noticeable in real life images. So it's easier to crop (and maybe upscale in LR) if I need more reach, than to mount the TC and I will not loose another stop of light and get quite high ISOs, because I need also to stop down the Sigma 100-400 by one stop to f8 when using the TC .. so I end up with f11. I will send the TC back.

Now my questions and maybe you can help:

• Is the IQ difference of the Nikon 100-400 noticeable compared to the Sigma 100-400 (mainly at 400mm on a Z6)
• is the Sigma too "weak" for a Z7 sensor (Maybe i will upgrade in the future) and could this be a reason to get the Nikon 100-400
• Is it worth to get the Nikon 1.4 Z TC when I have the Nikon 100-400 , or is the effect on the IQ low when compared to a cropped picture.
• Can I use the Nikon 100-400 with a TC wide open at 400mm and do I still get good results?

Having just tested out the Z 1.4TC on the Nikon 100-400mm lens, I can only address the last two points. I was not thrilled with the sharpness of my photos when I used the TC. So I would recommend just cropping and not bothering with the 1.4TC.

Thank you...

In the past I tested a TC 1.4III on a 300pf and came to a similar conclusion .. it was not worth to use the TC.

The Z mount TC's are so much better than the F mount TC's. For example the 70-200 S with a TC 1.4 doesn't lose any visible sharpness, and I have seen great sharpness with that TC on the 100-400 as well. You cannot compare the F mount TC's to the Z mount TC's. I'm not sure why a previous poster was seeing such a loss of sharpness. The only real losses are in using a higher ISO and loss of exposure. That can be critical for sports or BIF, but on the tripod, base ISO, and stopped down a bit the results are fantastic.

As to the Sigma 100-400mm lens, I have no opinion since I have never tried this lens.

 

[z2122]

I am not in agreement with those who have struggled with image quality when using the ZTC14 on the 100-400. I find this has no impact on AF speed when shooting in good light and the image quality is great. Excellent when not using a TC, reduced to Great as a result of the loss of 1-stop of light and need to use faster shutter speeds and higher ISO.

The ZTC14 is far superior to the f-mount version. AND the ZTC20, while light years better than the F-mount version should only be used as a desperation move.

In body cropping is a choice - I prefer to leave to Lightroom.

So feedback on the 100-400 and 1.4TC combo runs about 2 to 1 in favor of the combo (unscientific to be sure). I suspect it all boils down to what each of us think acceptable sharpness is. I all but gave up using TCs on F-mount, but now that I have the 100-400 I think it is time to give it one last try. I usually have good light at airshows and other favorite places, so I think I should be able to overcome the loss of light. Now I just have to find one...

super .. this is really the difference for me compared to the Sigma 100-400. A useable TC with great IQ

--
catch the light - explore emotions

 

[Roy Deters]

I have had 4 Sigma zooms. I didn’t like any of them and got rid of all of them. None were even close to my z 100-400. Also I see no image quality loss using my z 1.4 tc.

 

[rangel28]

Since 1 year I have the Sigma 100-400 and I am using it on a Z6. So far the IQ is good, also compared to a 70-200f4G and to a 24-200Z . The center sharpness is the same , the 70-200f4G is a little bit sharper on the edges compared to the Sigma 100-400.

Now I ordered the Sigma 1401 TC and tested it. There is a very light improvement when I compare the pictures with or without TC at the same size ( object have the same size on my monitor) but this improvement is hardly noticeable in real life images. So it's easier to crop (and maybe upscale in LR) if I need more reach, than to mount the TC and I will not loose another stop of light and get quite high ISOs, because I need also to stop down the Sigma 100-400 by one stop to f8 when using the TC .. so I end up with f11. I will send the TC back.

Now my questions and maybe you can help:

• Is the IQ difference of the Nikon 100-400 noticeable compared to the Sigma 100-400 (mainly at 400mm on a Z6)?
• is the Sigma too "weak" for a Z7 sensor (Maybe i will upgrade in the future) and could this be a reason to get the Nikon 100-400?
• Is it worth to get the Nikon 1.4 Z TC when I have the Nikon 100-400 , or is the effect on the IQ low when compared to a cropped picture?
• Can I use the Nikon 100-400 with a TC wide open at 400mm and do I still get good results?

I thiught also about the new 400 4.5, but ai need the flexibility of a zoom.

While I can't answer all of your questions, I can tell you the Z 100mm-400mm pairs very nicely with the 1.4 teleconverter. I have not seen any change in IQ or focusing speed, and with the teleconverter, "wide open" is f8, so you should not see any loss in sharpness.

Regarding the Sigma, although I don't have it I did a lot of research on it and according to everything I've read it's a very good lens. Of course, with a Z camera, you have to use the FTZ and then, if you want more distance, the teleconverter will make the camera even longer and heavier. The Sigma, as you know, is much less expensive than the Nikon lens.

I have had Sigma lenses in the past and have had situations where the lens would cause the camera to freeze, forcing me to take out the battery and restart the camera that way. Hopefully this isn't an issue with Z cameras but it did happen to me with some F mount cameras in the past, so I tend to now stick with Nikon lenses, even though they are more pricey.

 

[rich_cx139]

my sigma 100-400 works without issues and certainly good to excellent sharpness over most of the frame ( FF ).

This is with or without a TC1401 and on a Z6, D500 and Nikon V1,2,3

I imagine that the Z100-400 is better towards the edges - but this is just looking at the respective MTFs and AF speed is probably better on the Z.

Just as an aside, for the 300pf, there is about a 5% drop in resolution ( with the tc 14 e ii or iii ) according to Nasim on Photography Life and this is probably what I see. I have had little success with the tc 17ii on any body.

I think, like lenses, there is some variability between TC copies.

 

[Ricardo00]

I am not in agreement with those who have struggled with image quality when using the ZTC14 on the 100-400. I find this has no impact on AF speed when shooting in good light and the image quality is great. Excellent when not using a TC, reduced to Great as a result of the loss of 1-stop of light and need to use faster shutter speeds and higher ISO.

The ZTC14 is far superior to the f-mount version. AND the ZTC20, while light years better than the F-mount version should only be used as a desperation move.

In body cropping is a choice - I prefer to leave to Lightroom.

It is hard to design a perfect test quantifying the effect of the Z TC14 on the 100-400mm since the aperture goes from f/5.6 to f/8 and the FL also changes. Not sure why one needs faster shutter speeds? Because of the greater FL? Anyway, I did a number of tests for how I would use the 100-400mm lens with a TC. One example is shown below, a comparison between my 500mm PF lens and the 100-400mm f/5.6 with the 1.4TC. I tried to keep the variables constant, but obviously one can do the test many different ways. For me, the 500mm PF was better than the 100-400mm with the 1.4TC. These tests were only done with a single copy of the Z 1.4TC and the 100-400mm lens. So maybe this Z 1.4TC is not as good as some others? I would have hoped for $550 Nikon would have performed some quality tests on their products?




shooting with the 100-400mm plus 1.4TC




comparison with the 500mm PF

 

[emax]

Wow. That TC's a lemon. Did you say it was past the warranty period?

 

[Ricardo00]

Wow. That TC's a lemon. Did you say it was past the warranty period?

It is about 6 months old but this was the first time I used it, never previously having a Z lens. So it is past the point when I can return it to BH but can send it to Nikon. However my experience with Nikon is that they will say it is "within specs".

 

[JasonTheBirder]

I am not in agreement with those who have struggled with image quality when using the ZTC14 on the 100-400. I find this has no impact on AF speed when shooting in good light and the image quality is great. Excellent when not using a TC, reduced to Great as a result of the loss of 1-stop of light and need to use faster shutter speeds and higher ISO.

The ZTC14 is far superior to the f-mount version. AND the ZTC20, while light years better than the F-mount version should only be used as a desperation move.

In body cropping is a choice - I prefer to leave to Lightroom.

It is hard to design a perfect test quantifying the effect of the Z TC14 on the 100-400mm since the aperture goes from f/5.6 to f/8 and the FL also changes. Not sure why one needs faster shutter speeds? Because of the greater FL? Anyway, I did a number of tests for how I would use the 100-400mm lens with a TC. One example is shown below, a comparison between my 500mm PF lens and the 100-400mm f/5.6 with the 1.4TC. I tried to keep the variables constant, but obviously one can do the test many different ways. For me, the 500mm PF was better than the 100-400mm with the 1.4TC. These tests were only done with a single copy of the Z 1.4TC and the 100-400mm lens. So maybe this Z 1.4TC is not as good as some others? I would have hoped for $550 Nikon would have performed some quality tests on their products?

I don't doubt that the 100-400 + 1.4X TC is worse than the 500PF but is it possible you introduced some motion blur in the 100-400 shot? It seems way worse than it ought to be. It's really unusable.

 

[emax]

Based on the picture you posted, your TC is only qualified to be a paper weight.

Is there any way you could rent or borrow a second TC to shoot a comparison test?

 

[Ricardo00]

I am not in agreement with those who have struggled with image quality when using the ZTC14 on the 100-400. I find this has no impact on AF speed when shooting in good light and the image quality is great. Excellent when not using a TC, reduced to Great as a result of the loss of 1-stop of light and need to use faster shutter speeds and higher ISO.

The ZTC14 is far superior to the f-mount version. AND the ZTC20, while light years better than the F-mount version should only be used as a desperation move.

In body cropping is a choice - I prefer to leave to Lightroom.

It is hard to design a perfect test quantifying the effect of the Z TC14 on the 100-400mm since the aperture goes from f/5.6 to f/8 and the FL also changes. Not sure why one needs faster shutter speeds? Because of the greater FL? Anyway, I did a number of tests for how I would use the 100-400mm lens with a TC. One example is shown below, a comparison between my 500mm PF lens and the 100-400mm f/5.6 with the 1.4TC. I tried to keep the variables constant, but obviously one can do the test many different ways. For me, the 500mm PF was better than the 100-400mm with the 1.4TC. These tests were only done with a single copy of the Z 1.4TC and the 100-400mm lens. So maybe this Z 1.4TC is not as good as some others? I would have hoped for $550 Nikon would have performed some quality tests on their products?

I don't doubt that the 100-400 + 1.4X TC is worse than the 500PF but is it possible you introduced some motion blur in the 100-400 shot? It seems way worse than it ought to be. It's really unusable.

I did multiple shots with both and this is a representative one, but they all looked like that (I was shooting at 1/2000). For me, the conclusion is that I am better off using the 500mm PF, maybe not surprising as you said though thought a Z lens might give me some advantages on the Z9. I also definitely saw a decrease in acuity with the 100-400mm when I added the 1.4TC, again maybe not surprising though others said no difference. Luckily this 100-400mm is a rental, so goes back tomorrow. Will try a 400mm f/4.5 if mine comes in a reasonable time. Unfortunately the Z 1.4TC is mine (put in the order with the Nikon Z9 and 100-400mm when they were released).

 

[BasilG]

comparison with the 500mm PF

LOL. Surely didn't expect to see renderings of the NPC when clicking this thread.

 

[Ricardo00]

comparison with the 500mm PF

LOL. Surely didn't expect to see renderings of the NPC when clicking this thread.

Haha, the covers of Science magazine make nice targets (besides it is the only magazine where I still have a subscription for the print version). Usually I pick one that has an animal on the cover (which they often do) but this was the only one I had at the time.

 

[Rich Rosen]

I never owned a Sigma 100-400, so I cant answer comparison questions. I have owned the 120-300 f2.8 sport from Sigma, which I felt was an excellent lens (except for weight). So I do have a little bit of a point of reference. The Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 VR S is a sharp lens. Its focusing speed is faster than my old Sigma. while being lighter. It covers more focal lengths, but does not have an f 2.8 aperture nor a set wide aperture. It's variable. With the Z TC-1.4X, there is no noticeable loss of sharpness. Focus speed with the TC is not an issue.