Sigma 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM C available for pre-order for $800

I think all Sigma lenses with max. aperture of 6.3 will report 5.6 to the camera so you will have all AF points active.

AF accuracy won't be better than the Nikon in any case and i would be surprised if it will match it even.

Apr 1, 2017*permalink

NikonD800Es

If that info is of any help to you, I can tell that while using my D810 with Sigma 150-6000 Sport which is f5.0-6.3 lens, I have noticed I can use all AF points even in a bit overcast conditions. But that was for slow moving, almost still target.

Apr 1, 2017permalink

rd2443

I can confirm that I have all focus points available on my D500 at f6.3 with the Sigma 100-400.

May 26, 2017permalink

NikonD800Es

Why bird shooters believe so strongly that there is only one sort of photographers in existence in the world, and all those are of course small bird shooters?
Otherwise how to explain numerous complains from bird shooters on DPR that this new Sigma 100-400mm is way too short and utterly useless lens?!?

Apr 1, 2017*permalink

I am a bird shooter but i agree with you. Many of them are using 100-400 lenses from hides, etc. They are very useful.
Many people can't imagine someone else needs a tool they don't see a use for.

For example why would one need a 14mm 1.8 lens when im only ever shooting daylight landscapes at F11?

Apr 1, 2017permalink

Yup... an Ostrich is a bird too!

Apr 3, 2017permalink

You don't know much about bird photography if you think only a 600mm lens can be used for that.

Apr 3, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

But I think it is for APS-C , no?! A lightweight and 67mm front thread (The Canon and Nikon are 77mm) has me signing off already. Pre-ordering before at least a DXO mark review seems unwise, no?!

Mar 31, 2017permalink

sh10453

This is a DG lens, which means it is compatible with Full Frame cameras.
Sigma's APS-C designation is "DC".

Apr 1, 2017permalink

sh10453

I'm not familiar with Nikon, but the 77mm on the Canon gives you more light, and, therefore, a faster lens (f/4.5-5.6).

Apr 1, 2017permalink

Jack Simpson

I have to ask, again, how many Sigma mount cameras are out there? Not that many, IMHO … https://www.dpreview.com/products/sigma/cameras?subcategoryId=cameras

Jack

Mar 31, 2017*permalink

I agree, I seriously doubt anyone will buy this lens for their SD Quattro. But they kind of have to accommodate their own lens mount.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

TheDigitalDonbavand

With the quality and value of Sigma lenses at the moment and potential compatibility issues some new quality Sigma cameras could sell well

Apr 1, 2017permalink

Jack Simpson

I agree, to a point, O_C, but, I'm guessing, they would/should sell as many of this new 100-400 lens, in say, perhaps, a Pentax mount as they would in the Sigma mount. :)

Apr 4, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

If Nikon owners want a similar-sized, but mediocre zoom at a lower price, a used 1st gen. 80-400mm will fit the bill.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

What make this lens interesting is the MTF curves. Its not just ligth and compact, according to the MTF curves is absurdly sharp at the 400mm end wide open and thats what make the diference. If the lens actually deliver what it promise on the MTF curves is a lens far from mediocre, its better at the longer end that what Canon, Nikon, Fuji and Panasonic has to offer for considerably lower price.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

Yes, I saw that. I don't believe it unless one manufacture decided to actually listen to users that almost none of them use the short end of a long zoom.

Apr 1, 2017permalink

mosc

Hey Sigma, how about updating your 70-300mm F4-5.6 while you're at it? I wouldn't mind paying $400 for a modern 'C' version of it.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

for the ones that complaints that is not for pentax for just about $800 you can get a second hand 50-500 bigma at eBay...
I went to the Sigma 18-300 C from the Pentax 55-300 and in terms of image quality and lens built i was quite disappointed, too bad i had already sell the Pentax to a friend. I hope this 100-400 C to be better.
Maybe someday Sigma decides to start producing K mount again... who knows.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

Rioch should just buy Sigma (or Tamron)... problem solved...

Apr 3, 2017permalink

yeah you wish... they have a money making machine in their basement

Apr 3, 2017permalink

keepreal

Dimensions: of 86.4 x 182.3mm are reasonable for 100-400mm but since when is 1180g lightweight?

You could say the same of may lenses these days where that claim is made.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

jnd

Since Canon's 100-400m weights 1380g, or 1570g in the new version. Same for the Nikon 80-400mm. It is light relative to the 400mm reach.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

keepreal

All those weights are outrageous.

Design these days are computerised and designs less imaginative. My Nikkor AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR weighs 745g. A similar design to 400mm need weigh no more than another 100g and that is quite heavy enough. But why the public puts up with it, heaven knows.

Take the Nikon AIS series and compare with contemporary Nikkors. Many of them are not as good and much, much bigger and/or heavier. Don't dispute what I am saying by pointing out auto focus adds to the bulk and weight. Yes it does, but not by that much.

Frankly I think modern equipment is crazy and the public equally crazy for going along with it. The technology allows huge size images of high quality but so good it is overkill for most people's real needs. Bulk and weight havein most cases entirely been sacrificed. Even MFT now is competing for bluk and weight with the more reasonable APS-C. Quite pointless. Real photographers, other than some professionals do not need that.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

babart

Strange, isn't it. I realize there must be room for focusing apparatus but today's lenses seem heavier and larger than needed.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

@keepreal: I think you are way off with your calculations. Extra 100mm needs 100g plus only? Just check the difference between a 300mm and 400mm prime from any era. The weight almost doubles.

Apr 1, 2017permalink

Fujica

The price seems attractive until you see its light gathering capabilities, then you understand that this lens is actually not what you want.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

badi

well... you rarely need 400mm indoors. :))
Yes, that's true... but it's a compact super-tele-zoom. Definitely not expecting a F 2.8 in that type of lens. If the performance of the lens wide open is good enough, it will sure fill some bills.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

photo_rb

5 miles into a steep hike, I would likely thing this is exactly the 400mm telephoto zoom I wanted.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

Azathothh

Tell me buddy what's the price of a 400 mm f2.8?

Mar 31, 2017permalink

babart

A 400/2.8? Lots of money, especially since you'd need a porter or a wheelbarrow to move it around.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

pahnson

Well, if Sigma announces a big 1,4 lense people complain because of weight... if Sigma announces a light tele-lense people complain because its not fast enough...

Mar 31, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

2.8? who said anything about 2.8, he only said "light gathering capabilities" and nothing about shooting 400mm indoors. What is the point of these replies? let people have their option.

Apr 2, 2017permalink

Azathothh

"What is the point of these replies? let people have their option."

Don't you notice a contradiction there?

Apr 2, 2017permalink

jaykumarr

The DPreview reviewed Canon 100-400L II . But nothing to compare. I request Dprview to do a comparison or review of Nikon 80-400 or This Sigma here.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

LiangMing

This lens is not long enough for bird shooting. It is OK to shoot big animal or sports. Even with APSC camera, the 150-600 is still the way to go for bird shooting.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

It's a good thing you're not going to be using it for bird shooting then...

Mar 31, 2017permalink

Tobamory

Bring on that motorsport :)

Mar 31, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

@ LiangMing: I agree the 150-600 has been a great lens for all birding and wildlife, I have been able to get great shots from a distance without disturbing them. I also added the 1.4TC to my Sigma Sport and results at 840mm have been really good if you can keep your shutter speed high.

Apr 2, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

Seems like a great price for this lens but why 5-6.3, maybe price, weight, just seems like it could have been 5 or 5.6 across the range. I'll just keep using my 150-600 sport in till I can't, worth ever pound.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

quiquae

You make it sound like going from f/6.3 to f/5 is trivial, but 2/3 of a stop brighter, or 1.26x larger radius, or 1.6x the effective entrance pupil. You're looking at a completely different beast at that point.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

@quiquae, not trivial just wondering, I'm not a lens engineer. Nikon has the 200-500 5.6 and just seemed like it could have been a bit wider, apparently not.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

badi

Well, you don't have to be a lens engineer to understand that a brighter lens needs to be larger because that's how physics works.
The nikon lens you refer is much wider, longer and has 2 times the weight.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

Universal Creations

quiquae: it's f/6.3 vs f/5.6 which is 1/3 stop and 1.26x larger entrance pupil ;)

Mar 31, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

@badi, Wow thanks for the info that was really helpful! and you are obviously not an engineer either, if you have read my comment weight and cost was mentioned, I was just wondering why 5-6.3 and I would have liked to see it faster like the Canon that’s all and even if it weights more and it’s bigger! I don’t care. This lens was aimed at light weight and light budget, just not for me I still muscles. I have one lens that covers this range and more, nothing special here just more of a kit lens (C). It’s funny how people like your opinion as long as they agree with it and it matches theirs.

Apr 2, 2017permalink

Robert Holloway

Wonder how it will perform on the MC-11 adapter (which I have) for A Sony a7r2. Might be a better solution than Sony 100-300 at $1100.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

Robert Schroeder

I'm having the same thoughts with regard to the Panasonic/Leica 100-400/4-6.3 for Micro Four Thirds ($1800 at B&H), which doesn't seem to be able to provide consistent image quality in the first place. Now I could get the Sigma for Canon *and* the Metabones smart adapter and still pay significantly less. Oh, and there is the Speed Booster option, too, making it a 70-280/3.5-4.5.

That said, I'm eager to see what the reviews will say.

Mar 31, 2017*permalink

tnonline

Robert,
What is the Speed Booster solution for Sigma lens + MC11 on A7r2?

Apr 3, 2017permalink

400 is about 600 mm FOV on APSC... shooting in 1.3x crop mode is about 780 mm 15MP files... a viable alternative when the 150-600 mm is not required.

Mar 30, 2017permalink

KentG

If 1.5x crop mode is 600mm 1.3x crop mode would be closer to 500mm not 780mm.

Mar 30, 2017permalink

My calculation was based on APSC 24MP, which is inherently 1.5x to start with, and 1.3x on top of it would be close to 780mm but 24MP comes down to 15MP (cropping the 24MP will give the same result of course but this will give smaller files and longer continuous shooting).

Mar 30, 2017permalink

Azathothh

Nice! Now let's see if it doesn't have those very common focus problems the latest Sigma lenses have....

Mar 30, 2017permalink

ThatCamFan

O.o wait what?! Only 800$? TAKE MY MONEY!

Mar 30, 2017permalink

tex

Well, apparently NFP: Not For Pentax....

Mar 30, 2017permalink

And no MFT option either... I thought that NFP meant 'not for Panasonic' :)
[I was carried away by the recent Panasonic re-org news]

A lens like this - may be a bit lighter and smaller - would have been a good alternative for the expensive Panasonic 100-400 mm.

Mar 30, 2017*permalink

(unknown member)

There are some 3rd party adapters to use Canon lenses on m43 and keep autofocus, I would not be surprize if Sigma decide to start making their own adapters similar to what they did with Sony. At half the price of the Panasonic 100 400, but better MTF curves it could be indeed a good choice for m43. It weigth less than 200grs more than the pana 100 400 and less than the Oly 300 f4 (which is also beaten at the MTF curves).

Mar 30, 2017permalink

Yet available in a Sigma SA mount... why? Does anyone still own Sigma DSLRs?
Surely they would make more money producing some in a Pentax K mount instead of a Sigma mount (people may actually buy some of those!)...

Mar 31, 2017permalink

Matt1645f4

@tex, I'm starting to get a little annoyed and concerned that few lens by 3rd party manufacturers are not support Pentax. It would be good if they explained the reasons why.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

dansclic

When you buy a body, you also buy a lens system. Knowing that, eveyone should know there are not too many alternatives to Pentax lenses....
if you want more second brand lenses, buy canon or nikon bodies.
It is useless to complain every time that this or that lens is not fitted for Pentax. All people know that for long.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

dansclic

@tomi o
There is few chance you get a sharp image with a 100-400 which is a 200-800 lens for m43. From 500/600 mm it is nearly impossible to get a tack sharp shot without a tripod...
Olympus and'panasonic are also manufacturing a 100-300

Mar 31, 2017permalink

@dansclic
I've been using the Pentax system for decades. Both Tamron and Sigma (and other 3rd Party manufacturers) used to offer almost all of their lenses in a Pentax mount as well as Canikon and Minolta/Sony. What we are complaining about is NOT that they never offered them in Pentax, but that they no longer do (espaexcially at a time where Pentax is now producing more and better DSLRs that are becoming more popular. So your criticism of our criticism is invalid.
So "when I bought my [Pentax] body" Sigma and Tamron DID produce most of their lenses in a Pentax mount.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

Matt1645f4

@dansclic when i started out with Pentax nearly ever lens from Tamron and Sigma was Available for Pentax. Pentax Lenses in the main are Superior to third party manufactures. But when it comes to 400-600mm lenses theirs only one option. So the lack of a 150-600 is of concern for those of us that shoot Pentax.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

PentUP: "Yet available in a Sigma SA mount... why? Does anyone still own Sigma DSLRs?"

It is a matter of ownership and pride. Remember, when Fuji introduced their movie lenses recently for E mount but not their own mount, there was a lot of criticism.

Besides, Sigma uses their native mount as the baseline for design and feature testing. It then 'translates' to other mounts as they are all reverse engineered.

Mar 31, 2017*permalink

Matt1645f4: "It would be good if they explained the reasons why."

It is just a matter of market share. If there is enough volume for any manufacturer to make money, they will surely make it. I don't see any other reason.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

John C Tharp

If they don't bother with Sony A-mount, why would they bother with Pentax?

While it'd be nice given that both Sony and Pentax are putting more effort into their legacy mount systems with the A99 II and K-1, it's easy to understand that producing such lines could be losing propositions from a business standpoint.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

"Sigma uses their native mount as the baseline for design and feature testing. It then 'translates' to other mounts as they are all reverse engineered."
I think i have read that their camera business makes them loose money but just by that reason is that they produce lenses in sigma mount and why they need to produce the cameras.
I wonder if they could get an agreement with pentax so they don't need to reverse engineer anything and then they could use pentax cameras too to develop their lens. Anyway in an interview they said that will be looking for pentax sales to see if they start producing lens again sometime.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

Back when their Global Vision with A, S and C product strategy was announced, they explained how the new QA methods using Faveon based test equipment gives them better results. I read Faveon, I think Sigma camera!

Both the idea and execution were good because there are not too many complaints with these lenses.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

Sigma is tightening up its lens offerings, no more m4/3rd or Pentax support. Tamron stinks for availability unless you own a Nikon or Canon and now Sony. Tokina...weren't they a lens company some time ago?

Mar 31, 2017permalink

@Satyaa "Both the idea and execution were good because there are not too many complaints with these lenses." well i have heard and read several focusing issues with the A line at least... anyway yeah nice lens.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

mxx

Not everybody wants to trade down to a Nikon or Canon body, unfortunately.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

Tieu Ngao

The Tamron/Sigma 150-600 are simply too big, too heavy for my shooting style (only 5% on sports/wildlife). This Sigma 100-400 looks like a good and practical alternative. Can't wait for the reviews!

Mar 30, 2017permalink

Gatoraied

Given my history with Sigma lens quality and its repair service where three different lenses had issues which were never fixed properly while under warranty and then once out of warranty they became a trio of $3k paperweights. That said, if they now make a better product and know how to fix them it seems Sigma could singlehandedly resurrect or bring back some affordable options which could help the sagging DSLR sales. Although I could never give them another sale for personal reasons, I think Sigma is the only lens company creating excitement in DSLR photography.

Mar 30, 2017permalink

Marximus

Tamron's new 70-200 and 85 are pretty great lenses IMO.

Mar 30, 2017permalink

That's a lot considering you can buy the Sigma 150-600 C for right at $1000. This lens had better have superior IQ to warrant that kind of price. I'd rather buy the first generation Tamron 150-600, right now, for $869.

Mar 30, 2017permalink

Entropy512

My guess is they're targeting this at people looking for a somewhat lighter/smaller lens than the 150-600 C, not necessarily significantly cheaper.

Remember, there are people charging over $1000 for 70-300 lenses.

Mar 30, 2017*permalink

If it's good wide open at 400mm then it would be a good deal. But there are no Sigma telephoto zooms that really excel at the long end so this lens would have to break new ground. I'd much rather pay $2000 for the Canon that is excellent then throw away $800 for something inferior. The Tamron 150-600 at 400mm is not bad. But yes, it's heavy. For birding you'll be using the 100-400 at 400 and wishing you had more.

Mar 30, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

Go with the Tamron G2, the G1 was a POS! I went thru 6 and gave up.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

DoubleDash

Available right after my holiday....:(

Love the price, thought it would be more expensive. But problably still >900euro's. EU is to expensive

Mar 30, 2017permalink

AlanWatson

Well US prices are always quoted without tax, European ones with tax, so they will always appear more expensive if you don't correct for that.

Mar 30, 2017permalink

Impulses

Although no one ordering it from B&H Photo to elsewhere in the US will pay tax on it unless they live in NY...

Mar 30, 2017permalink

PatMann

@Impulses - Most states with sales/use tax require payment of tax on Internet sales if the vendor doesn't charge it. That's one reason it's so much trouble to buy from B&H - I have to keep track of everything myself so I can pay the sales tax at the end of the year. Some people I'm sure evade the sales tax on internet sales, but it's still a legal requirement.

Mar 31, 2017permalink

Trubbtele

I have been wating for this lens. Not a heavy bazoka! Can be great for my Nikon D500.
The Sigma staff say that this is a good one.

Mar 30, 2017permalink

CaPi

Tasty! I am game.. sheduled for Safari & travel shooting in September.. this is a very affordable option.
Unlesss.. DPR let's me try one in exchange for my results :)
There is always hope ;)
But seriously- I considered renting a 100-400.. this one might be an option!

Mar 30, 2017permalink

xmeda

I like my Sig 100-300/4

100-400/5-6.3 is not worth existence. 60-300/4-5.6 FF lens would be more interesting both for APS-C and FF users.

Mar 30, 2017*permalink

John_A_G

Can't say I agree. For people who want reach for wildlife and a budget sports long lens, the longer the better. 300mm on full frame is just too short for a lot of wildlife. Heck, 300mm was short on APS-C.

Mar 30, 2017permalink

Entropy512

John - Especially since a 70-300 FF already exists from basically every lens manufacturer.

This is intended to be slotted in size/weight/cost in between those 70-300 lenses and the 150-600

Mar 30, 2017*permalink

Marximus

My Canon 100-400 is a fantastic zoo lens. If the Sigma has comparable image quality and AF performance I will be all over this lens.

Mar 30, 2017permalink

PatMann

At 1/3 stop slower, f/6.3 isn't a huge compromise with f/5.6 lenses provided the camera can AF at f/6.3. The size/weight advantages over an 80-400 f/5.6 are pretty significant here - I can see why someone would pick this if the image quality is good and the AF works well. Based on Sigma rep for C lenses, S version might be much better for AF if they bring one out, should still be more compact and less expensive than OEM 80-400s.

Mar 31, 2017*permalink

tangbunna

Sigma 120-400mm f/4.5-5.6 AF APO DG OS HSM Telephoto Zoom Lens
for Canon Digital SLR Cameras
$499.00

Mar 30, 2017permalink

I've tried that lens and it's disappointing, especially at 400mm.

Mar 30, 2017permalink

Markintosh

You can't even compare this 2 lenses — new generation of Sigma lenses (C and A) are awesome. Old lens is very soft at 400.

Mar 31, 2017permalink