« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 10 posts | 
by rene on Tue Oct 30, 2018 9:37 am
rene
Forum Contributor
Posts: 355
Joined: 28 Aug 2003
Location: United-Kingdom
My camera store here in the UK has just sent me the new Sigma 60-600 Sports lens to test with the MC11 Sigma adapter (Canon to Sony E). My experience with adapted long Sigma lenses on Sony bodies had been pretty disappointing, so my hopes that this would be any better were low. Now the weather isn’t great and for sure I need to do more testing but I have been pleasantly surprised! AF works fine and is pretty snappy in AFC. Where with the 150-600 S lens I was not able to use AFC at all from 500mm onwards, it seems to work fine with this lens. More testing for sure to come to a conclusion about this lens! One issue : it is impossible to tightly lock the Arca style lens foot of the lens on the Uniqball....it keeps sliding backwards and forward. I have emailed Uniqball about it but i don't think there is much they can do. It is also not the first time i have had this issue with the Uniqball.

[font=system-ui, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, ".SFNSText-Regular", sans-serif]
Image


[/font]
 

by rene on Wed Nov 07, 2018 1:33 pm
rene
Forum Contributor
Posts: 355
Joined: 28 Aug 2003
Location: United-Kingdom
I have done some hands on with the Sigma 60-600. You can read it here


http://naturepics.co.uk/2018/11/05/sigma-60-600-dg-os-hsm-the-new-kid-on-the-block/
 

by Scott Fairbairn on Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:27 pm
User avatar
Scott Fairbairn
Forum Contributor
Posts: 5131
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Member #:00437
Review and lens test here. Astounding performance for such a large focal range.
https://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test= ... est_ob=545
 

by rene on Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:47 pm
rene
Forum Contributor
Posts: 355
Joined: 28 Aug 2003
Location: United-Kingdom
Well it kind of echo’s my experiences so far. I’m surprised that there is so little interest for this lens on this forum. I also got hold of the TC1401 and tried it with the MC11. I would normally not use a 1.4 converter in a relatively slow zoom lens but I was surprised how well it worked on the Sony A9/A7R3
Rene
 

by Scott Fairbairn on Fri Nov 09, 2018 2:05 pm
User avatar
Scott Fairbairn
Forum Contributor
Posts: 5131
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Member #:00437
rene wrote:Well it kind of echo’s my experiences so far. I’m surprised that there is so little interest for this lens on this forum. I also got hold of the TC1401 and tried it with the MC11. I would normally not use a 1.4 converter in a relatively slow zoom lens but I was surprised how well it worked on the Sony A9/A7R3
Rene
I suspect the lack of interest is partly due to low expectations with such a large zoom range. When it was first announced I thought it would be low quality but to see it outshine a respected lens like the Nikkor 200-500 is unexpected. Does the A9 chug along at 20fps or no?
 

by sdaconsulting on Sat Nov 10, 2018 1:05 am
sdaconsulting
Forum Contributor
Posts: 579
Joined: 21 Aug 2003
Location: Moncure, NC
Looking at the Lenstip bird images, I have to say that my Sony 100-400 GM + 1.4 converter seems to be just as good if not better at the long end. But I don't know if that's a problem with the Canon AF?
Matthew Cromer
 

by E.J. Peiker on Sat Nov 10, 2018 6:32 am
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
sdaconsulting wrote:Looking at the Lenstip bird images, I have to say that my Sony 100-400 GM + 1.4 converter seems to be just as good if not better at the long end. But I don't know if that's a problem with the Canon AF?
The Sony 100-400 + 1.4x is optically superior to the 200-500. Add to that an inherently more accurate AF system and you get that result.  If you can live with f/8 as your maximum aperture, you will get sharper shots with that combo than the 200-500.  The combo also costs nearly 3 times as much as the 200-500.  That lens, while good for the money is probably the most overrated long telephoto lens on the market based on optical quality alone.  It's great for the price but every lens on the market that Costs more is better.
 

by Jens Peermann on Sat Nov 10, 2018 6:36 am
User avatar
Jens Peermann
Forum Contributor
Posts: 5155
Joined: 5 Apr 2004
Location: Lake Tahoe area of Nevada
sdaconsulting wrote:Looking at the Lenstip bird images, I have to say that my Sony 100-400 GM + 1.4 converter seems to be just as good if not better at the long end. But I don't know if that's a problem with the Canon AF?
This actually could explain the lack of interest in this lens. The Sony FE 100-400 GM is a hell of a lens in native mount without any potential compatibility issues. And if used with a converter or a crop camera it will reach 600mm or close to that. No need to waste time and money on
a possible disappointment.
A great photograph is absorbed by the eyes and stored in the heart.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Sat Nov 10, 2018 6:41 am
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Jens Peermann wrote:
sdaconsulting wrote:Looking at the Lenstip bird images, I have to say that my Sony 100-400 GM + 1.4 converter seems to be just as good if not better at the long end. But I don't know if that's a problem with the Canon AF?
This actually could explain the lack of interest in this lens. The Sony FE 100-400 GM is a hell of a lens in native mount without any potential compatibility issues. And if used with a converter or a crop camera it will reach 600mm or close to that. No need to waste time and money on
a possible disappointment.
I think the general lack of interest has to do with the fact that there has never been a 10x zoom on the market that has performed well on the long end.  Pretty much anytime you get over 4x, things go downhill fast - you trade off optical quality for a lot of convenience.  Lens nerds, like the ones that would be reading this thread, have that in there head. ;)
 

by Jens Peermann on Sat Nov 10, 2018 6:49 am
User avatar
Jens Peermann
Forum Contributor
Posts: 5155
Joined: 5 Apr 2004
Location: Lake Tahoe area of Nevada
Oh look, another early bird…

To tell you the truth, I am one of those who get uncomfortable with ratios of more than 3x or 4x. I was, however interested in this lens because it covers the gap between 70 and 100 that I currently have between the 28-70 and the 100-400. I just eventually realized that covering those 30mm is not enough reason to dish out the money for that lens.
A great photograph is absorbed by the eyes and stored in the heart.
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
10 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group