Canon vs Sigma lens: Just looking to compare Canon zoom lens with Sigma. Are there some general pros and cons or is it specific to the indiv lens? Ex canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6l is ii...

Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum

Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰

Canon vs Sigma lens

Page 1 of 2 next>

Apr 11, 2020 09:47:11 #

bhad

Just looking to compare Canon zoom lens with Sigma. Are there some general pros and cons or is it specific to the indiv lens?

Ex
canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6l is ii usm
Vs

a comparable sigma

Apr 11, 2020 09:56:20 #

tradio Loc: Oxford, Ohio

I assume cost would be a factor.
I deal with Nikon glass but, I have several of the Sigma ART series lenses and I find them to be very well made and overall, great lenses.

Apr 11, 2020 09:56:53 #

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

bhad wrote:

Just looking to compare Canon zoom lens with Sigma. Are there some general pros and cons or is it specific to the indiv lens?

Ex
canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6l is ii usm
Vs

a comparable sigma

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-597795-1.html

The Canon lens will have faster more accurate AF on a Canon body - if that matters - especially for moving subjects.
.

Apr 11, 2020 10:05:32 #

Zooman 1

Go with the Canon 100-400 I prefer it over my Sigma 150-600.

Apr 11, 2020 10:26:04 #

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

I have a Sigma 100-400 and for the most part have been satisfied with it. My wallet was the first benefactor to the tune of about $700. I lost about a 1/2 stop of light with the Sigma, resell value isn’t as good, and the Canon equivalent focus system is faster and should be more accurate. Kind of hard to judge that without a “real” test, it’s a little difficult to make a direct comparison (for me). The Sigma, like a Tamron, is a reverse engineered lens. So, how well that was accomplished and build quality is for me a principal driver. My Sigma 100-400 and 150-600 firmware was been updated multiple times in the couple years I’ve owned them, mainly to improve compatibility issues. All that said, if I were do it all over again, I would have neither Sigma and own a Canon 100-400 ii and a 1.4 teleconverter for about the same amount that I’ve spent. That said, Sigma tech support has been just as good as Canon’s and both companies have not played the “point to the other guy” game.

Apr 11, 2020 10:46:14 #

CWGordon

I think Sigma makes a high-quality line of lenses. I shoot primarily Nikon, but have and have had some Sigma ones. I was never dissatisfied. That said if prices were comparable on similar lenses, I would prefer having all Nikon lenses. But, they aren’t and I don’t.

Apr 11, 2020 13:07:23 #

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

bhad wrote:

Just looking to compare Canon zoom lens with Sigma. Are there some general pros and cons or is it specific to the indiv lens?

Ex
canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6l is ii usm
Vs

a comparable sigma

If you are talking about comparable focal length, there is no contest - the Canon 100-400 is way ahead of the others.

If you are talking about comparable price - the Sigma 150-600 Sport will give the Canon a run for it's money, especially if you intend on using the Canon with a 1.4x TC. Comparable AF performance,but slightly better sharpness with the Sigma - at least at maximum zoom. The Tamron 150-600 G2 is also quite sharp and a couple of pounds lighter than the Sigma. I would not hesitate to use any of the three - you really can't go wrong here. The Tamron is around $1200 btw, making it the best value.

Apr 11, 2020 13:47:58 #

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

imagemeister wrote:

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-597795-1.html

The Canon lens will have faster more accurate AF on a Canon body - if that matters - especially for moving subjects.
.

Apr 11, 2020 15:39:00 #

johngault007 Loc: Florida Panhandle

bhad wrote:

Just looking to compare Canon zoom lens with Sigma. Are there some general pros and cons or is it specific to the indiv lens?

Ex
canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6l is ii usm
Vs

a comparable sigma

I don't own any Sigma lenses, but I do have the one mentioned above and it's pretty amazing

Apr 12, 2020 06:24:07 #

mrtaxi Loc: Old Westbury NY, Fort Lauderdale, FL

I have several of the “Art” Sigma lenses and they are excellent. Almost equal to canon at about 60% of the price. In some reviews just as sharp. Build quality is considered equal to canon L glass. The downside is they are extremely heavy, take longer to focus, are not quite as fast, Have A tiny bit less weather sealing and the resale is less. I have the canon 100-400mm f/L 4.5-5.6 I USM and it’s a super lens. canon often has them refurbished with same warranty on their websight.

Apr 12, 2020 07:36:36 #

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

bhad wrote:

Just looking to compare Canon zoom lens with Sigma. Are there some general pros and cons or is it specific to the indiv lens?

Ex
canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6l is ii usm
Vs

a comparable sigma

If cost and budget are not a problem there is no equal to the Canon 100-400 II lens. I photograph in Florida wetlands and many of my friends shoot with that lens and get great results. It will hold up for years of hard work. It will retain it's value over time and has been built to tight specs. and has been manufactured to work on your Canon camera. Not the same story with Sigma.
Do yourself a great service and buy the Canon, you will not feel bad later on.

Apr 12, 2020 07:56:50 #

ggab Loc: ?

bhad wrote:

Just looking to compare Canon zoom lens with Sigma. Are there some general pros and cons or is it specific to the indiv lens?

Ex
canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6l is ii usm
Vs

a comparable sigma

My Sigma and Tamron lenses are backups to my Canon L Glass.
The Tamron 150-600 G2 is back up to my Canon 300 f/2.8 IS with a 2x Converter.

I find that when I use telephoto lenses, I typically use them at the longest focal length 90% of the time.

My sigma 100 - 400 doesn't come close to my 100 - 400 IS USM II in either build quality, IQ or Focus speed and accuracy. In my real world tests, the Tamron and Sigma were really close. The Sigma cost less, that is why I bought it.
I had a Tamron 70 - 200 f/2.8 and really liked it until I bought a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 III. I considered the Tamron the sharpest lens I had until I bought the Canon.

There is a reason why Canon L Glass is more expensive and it is not marketing IMHO.
I am NOT saying the Sigma or Tamron lenses are bad, I am saying that the Canon L Glass is Great.

These are my experiences with my glass.
Your mileage may vary.

Apr 12, 2020 08:47:06 #

ELNikkor

Go for the Canon, even if you have to take a few more months to save up for it.

Apr 12, 2020 08:48:56 #

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Before I buy something substantial, I read a lot online. Look for comparisons of the two lenses. I bet there will be quite a few.

https://www.google.com/search?q=sigma+100-400mm+vs+canon+100-400mm&rlz=1C1SQJL_enUS889US889&oq=sigma+100-400mm+vs+canon+100-400mm&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l6.8967j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Apr 12, 2020 09:00:09 #

ggab Loc: ?

jerryc41 wrote:

Just a word of caution about the Sigma reviews. When it was first introduced, it had focus issues.
Roughly 4 months later a firmware update was offered that fixed the focus issues. If you look for Sigma 100-400 reviews, try to find reviews made after November 2017.

Page 1 of 2 next>

If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.

Main Photography Discussion

Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections

UglyHedgehog.com - Forum