# Sigma 100-400mm quick test



## AlanF (Jun 9, 2017)

I recently reported a quick comparison of the Sigma 100-400mm on my 5DSR with shots of a nearby flagpole. The results weren't quite as good as my Canon 100-400mm II. My local dealer got in another copy today and lent it to me for more extensive testing as I had a view to buying. I took shots of my favourite chart and compared it with my 100-400mm II and also my Sigma 150-600mm C on my 5DSR. Here are 100% crops from the centre at 10.5m distance. The Sigma (top) is not as good as its big brother at 400mm (bottom) or the Canon (middle).


----------



## AlanF (Jun 9, 2017)

The Canon (bottom) is sharper than the Sigma 100-400mm at 400mm and 19.7m distance. I used liveview for the Sigma in all of these test as I didn't AFMA it.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 9, 2017)

Finally, I tried the lenses with their correct 1.4xTCs at 560mm at 19.7m. This test decided me to take back the Sigma. The AF was very slow and the increase in resolution minimal over the bare lens. The Canon focussed quickly and the image was still good (bottom).


----------



## bholliman (Jun 16, 2017)

Significant differences! Thanks for taking the time to do this testing and posting. I would have expected sharpness at 400mm to at least equal the C150-600.

This lens is small, light (1120g) and less than 1/2 the price of the Canon 100-400 II (1570g), but unless size and low price are your overriding priorities, there isn't much to recommend this lens over the other lenses you compared it with.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 16, 2017)

Thanks for your comments. To be fair, I have looked at just two copies of the Sigma 100-400mm (which is twice as many as each of the other sites!). My Sigma 150-600mm C is also particularly good at 400mm, and is clearly a very good copy. Lenstip has rated the Sigma 100-400mm as slightly better than the Canon 100-400mm II and much better than the copy of the Sigma 150-600mm C they tested. TDP has their copy of the Sigma at 400mm as just behind the Canon 100-400mm II, which is in line with my findings.

I think the Sigma 100-400mm II is a nice lens, and for much of the time the differences in IQ would not be noticeable - extreme cropping is where you need every scrap of resolution. The consistency and speed of AF might be drawbacks, but we need to hear more reports.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jun 20, 2017)

Alan,

interesting review by Dustin Abbott. Very impressive performance by little Sigma ... :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41PvCOZgpC4




AlanF said:


> Thanks for your comments. To be fair, I have looked at just two copies of the Sigma 100-400mm (which is twice as many as each of the other sites!). My Sigma 150-600mm C is also particularly good at 400mm, and is clearly a very good copy. Lenstip has rated the Sigma 100-400mm as slightly better than the Canon 100-400mm II and much better than the copy of the Sigma 150-600mm C they tested. TDP has their copy of the Sigma at 400mm as just behind the Canon 100-400mm II, which is in line with my findings.
> 
> I think the Sigma 100-400mm II is a nice lens, and for much of the time the differences in IQ would not be noticeable - extreme cropping is where you need every scrap of resolution. The consistency and speed of AF might be drawbacks, but we need to hear more reports.


----------

