Sigma 150-600C too soft
Mar 2, 2020 03:59:20 #
Pablo8 wrote:
My 150~600 Sigma C straight out of the box on a Nikon body.
But it looks way overcooked in post?
Mar 2, 2020 05:33:41 #
Pablo8
Loc: Nottingham UK.
Grahame wrote:
But it looks way overcooked in post?
Could you explain further. I'm willing to benefit from your knowledge.
Mar 2, 2020 08:11:17 #
I also have the Sigma 150-600mm and find it to be softer than I'd hoped for, especially when fully extended to 600mm. Still, I've taken many sharp images with this lens, and find that avoiding the extreme focal length helps a lot.
I'd like to sell it and get the Nikon 200-500, but that will likely have to wait until I'm back in the States and have extra funds to spend on the upgrade.
I'd like to sell it and get the Nikon 200-500, but that will likely have to wait until I'm back in the States and have extra funds to spend on the upgrade.
Mar 2, 2020 09:10:41 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
I looked at only the first image in Canon's DPP. Consider updating your firmware and your exposure settings before sending-off the camera & lens for maintenance. Attached is a detailed analysis of the Egret.
That's a very good analysis, DP.
Mar 2, 2020 09:23:32 #
jmiller59 wrote:
I've had this lens for about a month. So far I am... (show quote)
1/400 at 600mm seems slow to me. Also do not understand the f11-13 choice If you are far enough away to need 600mm you are far enough away to get a lot of DOF wide open at 6.3. My guess is a combination of a too slow shutter speed introducing shake and possibly poor choice of focus setting options. At that distance I would have set a custom switch to reduce hunting since this lens (and the similar Tamron lenses) allow for this.
And pull back to say 550mm. Now long zooms are at their best at the extremes.
Mar 2, 2020 09:26:02 #
Test with Live View for lens potential. Put a thin strip of white tape on the ficus ring, shoot LV, switch out of LV, and watch the focus ring. If it the two modes have different positions there is front or back focus.
Mar 2, 2020 09:29:06 #
lrjames wrote:
I have the same lens I ended up buying the sigma dock to tune the lens and I have the Nikon d850 so I tune the lens to that camera and it is now spot on it is no longer soft
What distances from the objective end of the lens did you place your target for the adjustments?
Mar 2, 2020 10:08:20 #
I tried 2 150-600 Cs. Sent one for calibration but tuning still required and soft at 600. Second one not sent but after tuning still soft. LV should avoid ficus problems that could be adjusted by tuning but won't improve basic quality. It seems that some people get lucky! I'm dealing with a Tamron 18-400 with similar issues and am tempted to order several from Amazon (with free return) to see if I can get a good one.
Mar 2, 2020 10:21:21 #
The other answer is to sell or trade the lens and buy the excellent Canon EF 100-400L MKII and add the 1.4x MKII or MKIII extender if you need a longer FL. Not inexpensive (although you can find them used in the $1,100 - $1,200 range), but it will solve the sharpness problem if you use it correctly.
Mar 2, 2020 19:18:53 #
Pablo8 wrote:
Could you explain further. I'm willing to benefit from your knowledge.
With respect to my comment regarding the mouse image looking 'overcooked' I based this upon its 'very crunchy' appearance when viewed at the full size you uploaded it.
There are severe 'halos' running around edges behind the mouse and from my experience these are often caused by over generous use of the 'clarity' function, of which the Exif on that image indicates +70.
But, an excellent subject for using in assessing the performance of a lens.
Mar 2, 2020 19:42:54 #
Grahame wrote:
With respect to my comment regarding the mouse image looking 'overcooked' I based this upon its 'very crunchy' appearance when viewed at the full size you uploaded it.
There are severe 'halos' running around edges behind the mouse and from my experience these are often caused by over generous use of the 'clarity' function, of which the Exif on that image indicates +70.
But, an excellent subject for using in assessing the performance of a lens.
There are severe 'halos' running around edges behind the mouse and from my experience these are often caused by over generous use of the 'clarity' function, of which the Exif on that image indicates +70.
But, an excellent subject for using in assessing the performance of a lens.
I prefer to stay quiet - but I am NOT. Let's get this CLEAR, It is SOC ! Your imagination is running away !
It is a very nice image with some very minor CA. !.
Mar 2, 2020 20:24:10 #
imagemeister wrote:
I prefer to stay quiet - but I am NOT. Let's get this CLEAR, It is SOC !
On the assumption that your use of SOC is referring to 'straight out of camera' all I can say is that the Exif viewer I am using, (Jeffrey's Image Metadata Viewer) does not indicate this.
imagemeister wrote:
Your imagination is running away !
What I see is clearly view-able on my monitor and secondly, backed up by data which may or may not be correct.
imagemeister wrote:
It is a very nice image with some very minor CA. !
.
.
I would agree as you say that it is a "very nice image" if I were to relate that statement to subject/framing/cuteness/viewer impact, but I'm not. I related my comments to IQ (image quality) with respect to the specific mouse image portraying the performance of a lens.
I believe in this specific image the processing has masked/countered the true potential that could have been shown of a great capture demonstrating image quality obtainable from said lens.
Mar 2, 2020 20:46:06 #
Grahame wrote:
I would agree as you say that it is a "very nice image" if I were to relate that statement to subject/framing/cuteness/viewer impact, but I'm not. I related my comments to IQ (image quality) with respect to the specific mouse image portraying the performance of a lens.
I believe in this specific image the processing has masked/countered the true potential that could have been shown of a great capture demonstrating image quality obtainable from said lens.
I believe in this specific image the processing has masked/countered the true potential that could have been shown of a great capture demonstrating image quality obtainable from said lens.
mmmm, I see you are in hiding with no topics created ......
Mar 2, 2020 20:52:30 #
imagemeister wrote:
mmmm, I see you are in hiding with no topics created ......
At least if you are going to attempt to put down someones comment or try and support your own come up with something substantive and less childish.
Mar 2, 2020 21:57:52 #
Grahame wrote:
At least if you are going to attempt to put down someones comment or try and support your own come up with something substantive and less childish.
That IS substantive ....
.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.