great video, I own the sigma and have great super sharp images. pulsing does happen, but if you shoot enough you do get great quality. I own the sigma 1.4 converter and don't notice any difference in sharpness.
Thanks, Phil. Yeah, exactly 100 percent, if you shoot enough pictures, you'll get good quality ones. Thanks for letting me know about the Sigma 1.4 teleconverter sharpness. That's great info for anyone else watching 👍
Hi Phil Beighton, you might have been notified of a reply to your comment by another user. Having just read it, it was deliberately nasty and vindictive so I've banned the user from the channel and removed their comment. I hope all is well with you.
The best upgrade you can buy for this lens is the Leofoto CFC-01 lens foot .It has ARCA-SWISS and its very good to handheld . There is also a strap available from Leofoto with quick release system for this lensfoot.
Great video! I actualy some time ago concider the sigma to my R5 but i ended up with the EF 100-400 4,5-5,6L mkII. But i pulled the trigger on the RF100-500 few days ago. Its expected to arrive next tuesday. After watching this video im even more excited. Happy New Year 🎉
Happy New Year! Thanks for the comment. I've never used the EF 100-400 but I'm sure you'll be very happy with the focus speed and sharpness of the 100-500.
The rf 100 500 is miles away better even from the Sport version of that Sigma. It's sharp at wide open any time, the Sigma has to be at f8 to be potentially very sharp, on my pretentious R7.. I own them both, just a few days ago got the RF. Not even mentioning the af speed anc accuracy, and the way better stabiliser, way closer minimum focusing distance. It's definitely is worth the effort to get the RF.
Thanks for your comment, Cris. I've not used the Sigma on the R7 yet although I've just bought one! I find on the R6 f6.3 wide open is fine but it could just be my individual copy of the lens - plus the extra light the full frame senso lets in. I'll have to get it a try on the R7 and see how it performs.
Thanks, Basil. I've since bought a Lenscoat cover. Actually there;s a reveiw of it on the channel, but it's good to know that brand exists as I hadn't heard of them before, thank you :-)
Hi Phil: I have just stumbled upon your channel and am glad to see a comparison between these two lenses, both of which I own, along with the Sigma 60-600s and the EF 100-400MkII. I am a retired professional wildlife photographer with about 42 years of experience, and currently I shoot with the 5DsR, R5, R6 and R6MkII. My wildlife subjects vary from macro mammals of North American, to small birds in deep bush where I currently am in NZ. I must admit I am very careful with my gear, and simply encase the Sigma 150-600c in a plastic cover and, so far, have found no dust or moisture encroachment with the Sigma 150-600c. The RF 100-500 has massive weather sealing, like all L series lenses, so I would have no reservations about the extension of the lens. I personally have found no pulsing issues with my cameras: however, I don't use electronic shutter and find that those who use that seem to have more issues with pulsing - I would rather have fewer images that were sharp than lots of images with a bunch of soft ones. Most folks experiencing that seem to do so on the R7, which I my own investigations indicate is not as good a focusing system as the FF bodies I have. Also, a LOT depends on how the focusing of the R-series bodies is configured: it's not just a simple changeover from the DSLRs - these are much more sophisticated. The RF 100-500 had dual Nano-USM motors that make it blazing fast to focus. I have no issues with the circular clutch of the EF-L lenses - I have been used to it with the 28-300L, 100-400 MkI and MkII, and my RF 100-500 locks solidly and allows the lens to be locked at any focal length. I saw you trying to lock the clutch with gloves and my own experience is that this does not work well. I don't think the design itself is flawed per se, but there are cases of individual units needing adjustment and Canon service have dealt with those under warranty. All that said, your results are not unreasonable in terms of relative sharpness but, as you say, one also has to consider the difference in market and price. The Sigma 150-600c is an enthusiasts' lens and is priced accordingly. The RF 100-500L is a professional-grade lens that demands a significantly higher investment. Over here in NZ, the prices are: $1,400 and $5,400 respectively - so the Canon is almost four times the price.
Hi Trevor, thanks very much for your comment and I must apologise for the length of time it has taken for me to reply - I've been traveling abroad. Its great to know that as a professional you have confidence in the weather sealing of the 100-500. I tend to use case 2 for most of my focusing needs but I'm open to hearing about which modes work well for others. I prefer the RF lens for sharpness hut I must admit I do miss the extra 100mm of the Sigma, not just for the outright reach but also the extra buy of blury background that the zoom compression brings.
@@wildphil Thanks for responding Phil. Frankly when I address the need for gear, among others, I ask the following questions: What is the budget? An obvious limitation that needs to be held to. What subjects? That has a significant impact of lens type, and to a degree sensor size. What is the intended output? Of all the question, this one is rarely asked but arguably is the most critical. The investment required to generate high resolution, large Fine Art prints for sale is going to much greater than for someone generating images for digital display, or more so, for posting on the web - given many sites, especially social media, massively downsize the images for posting. This is particularly apropos to the dilemma you posed in your response. I have no issue using the Sigma 150-600c or 60-600s because I am not in the business of Fine Art production, and the availability of PP software like Topaz AI, Denoise, or Sharpen can make all the difference on top of apps like PS and LR. That is where one has to consider the balance of budget vs output and technique and a clinical analysis can be very revealing.
Thank you for a very informative video! I own the Sigma 150-600 and just rented the Canon 100-500. I'm thinking of upgrading but not sure. I'm going on vacation next week and will use them both and compare the results. Videos like this are very helpful when trying to make these decisions. Keep up the good work!
Thank you, you're very welcome. If it helps, where I live in the UK there are a few retailers that will refund the lens rental fee if you end up buying it, so it's worth looking out for that sort of deal if you're seriously considering purchasing one.
Thanks, Forrest. I think I'll look up usagear and see what they've got. I can also screw the peak design strap into the tripod foot, it's just I prefer to leave that free for a mounitng plate etc.
I had the sigma before I got my R6. I had it on a 7Dmkii. When I got the R6 I didn't miss the 1.5 crop effect of the 7Dmkii because the R6 has a better sensor and focusing system so I was getting more "keepers" with the new set up. I mainly photograph birds and birds in flight. At closer distances the Sigma focusing pulse was apparent (but not always) and I did miss some shots because of it. There were other occasions when the camera and lens thought the shot was in focus and back home you saw it wasn't. After a lot of thought I upgraded to the RF100-500. It was a huge amount of money on top of an upgraded body. Wow it was worth it. Yes the tripod foot is not as good. I used to carry my sigma and camera on a cross chest sling as I walked about. Now I just carry the new set up in my hand with a wrist strap as a back up. It is so much lighter. I tighten the zoom when walking about sometimes to stop it slipping out and it works. You are right about the balance of the Sigma especially when moved out from the body due to the RF converter. The slower aperture of the 100-500 only comes into play round about 450mm (?). I think the loss of 600mm is barely noticed as the image quality is so much better in the RF and I can crop a little more to make up for it. I was thinking of going for a large 2nd hand EF prime but decided I need the flexibility of a zoom if I'm paying out so much money. As long as someone is aware of the focusing issues before they use the Sigma with an RF mount I think it is great value for money compared to other alternatives.
Namaste Phill which Canon full frame body to which telephoto lens is enough to buy . Or else mirror less or mirror full frame body . Sigma or Tamron . Which gears are better than which gears & best for wildlife or Birding
HI Jayanth. I've never used the Tamron lenses so I cannot give you advice on them. I've only every sued Canon, so I can only talk about the Canon system, in which I find the full frame cameras of the R6 (mki and ii), R5, R3, R8 etc focus faster than APSC-crop of the R7 which I have recntly bought (in fact I plan to do a video on that soon). I have never used the EOS R or RP but as you probably want Animal Eye AF, your cheapest options are probable the R8 or R6 mki - or an R7 with the crop, but the R7 focus speed is slower in my experience due to the smaller sensor. Hope this helps.
I am using Canon R5C and Sigma 24-70 lens. How do I change the aperture on the Sigma lens using the aperture ring on the lens? It is not doing anything. I have to use the Canon R5 screen or dial button.
Hi there. Thanks for the comment. The control ring to change the aperture is only available on Canon RF lenses. The ring you refer to on the Sigma I belive is the focus ring for manual focus of the lens.
yeah, exactly. I make reference to it in the video actually.The lens was brand new and I hadn't yet decided which cover to buy. I've since bought one from Lenscoat and also reviewed it. Video in the channel.
Check out Duade Paton's channel. He has a video on some (member provided) settings for the Sigma lens and the R series camera that will really help with the pulsing.
Had the Sigma 150-600 C and just purchased the Canon RF100-500 and honestly the Canon is leaps & bounds better than the Sigma. Zero regrets, purchased used in like new condition. Razor sharp.
Found your video very interesting and informative. I myself enjoy Wildlife photography as an amateur and I own the EF 300mm 2.8f mk II prime with a 2 times converter and find the images to be superb, however, unless you have big muscles this combination is heavy going. I am looking at getting a lens for my R5 and going lite. After watching your video I am impressed with the results. Great video and subbed your channel. 👍😊
Also, I assume you kept the Cannon lens, can you give us any updates on your thoughts about differences between the two? As you've used them more, have the differences become more noticeable?
Yeah, so for me there are 2 things the Sigma does well. Firstly reach, don't underestimate that extra 100mm especially when put on a crop sensor for the extra reach - also the Sigma gives more blurry nice backgrounds due to the extra 100mm zoom compression. The 100 to 500 is more likely to get you the sharp shot if speed is important and you won't get many chances, it's also awesome to walk around with due to smaller and lighter size, in fact I clip it to a peak design capture clip on my backpack strap and can walk around with it all day - no way is that comfortable with the Sigma.
@@wildphilI assume u use the lens kit from peak design as well? Also do u think it’s worth to get the V3 capture clip? Lastly RF lenses are still crazily priced so as such I’m still using my Holy trinity EF lenses. Wonder when would it drop in price
Hi Phil, I wanted to ask you a question, why did you choose sigma c and not that sport? I'm a bit undecided about sigma sport, contemporary, tamron 150-600g2... I have a canon reflex. thanks and congratulations for the video
Thanka Diego. I have never used the sport, but for me it was price. Also the Contemporary was lighter. At the time I watched many reviews and I concluded the optical performance was similar. I am told the build quality is better on the sport and it has weather sealing, but its more expensive.
@@wildphil Yes, I too did a search yesterday evening, actually the contemporary is almost similar, even having the same focus motor and faster because the sport has more groups of lenses to move, plus it seems that the contemporary is resistant to dust and water, in the end the sport does not fully justify an outlay of €600. Thanks again🙏
@Phil Law Wildlife Photography I have used both contemporary and sports versions. At the end kept sports and sold contemporary. Sports is quite heavy, however auto focus performance is considerably better than contemporary. Also sports is very sharp wide open at f6.3 @ 600mm. For contemporary, you need to stop down to f8.0 @ 600mm to get same sharpness.
Thanks for the video. I can definitely relate to this. I have an R6 and have just sold my sigma 150-600 contemporary. It was ok but I mostly image low level aircraft and the autofocus was "ok" but a struggle at times. Where I go 450mm to 550mm full frame is ideal so I've taken the plunge and literally just ordered the rf 100-500. Hoping for improved af and I think the IQ will be a bit better as well.
Could you comment on switching from a crop sensor 77D vs the full frame R6? I'm considering getting a R6 M2 from an 80D but am concerned about loss of magnification without the crop sensor.
I’ve been looking at this myself and was seriously considering the R7 to get more megapixels on target and more reach however the shutter shock on the R7 is terrible, forcing us to use the electronic shutter which doesn’t have a great readout speed. I’m on the R5 for the resolution, faster electronic shutter readout speed and 4k 120fps, which is useful to me.
I was worried about the same thing when making that choice, actually. So I kept the 77D. But I always default to the R6, due to focus accuracy and sharpness of the mirrorless body vs the viewfinder in the 77d, the frame rate (I shoot 20fps electronic (I gather then R6 mkii is even faster!), silently for wildlife, a massively largely buffer too and for me the vastly superior high ISO performance. Not through choice, but I'll shoot up to 25,600 ISO with the R6 and then denoise the images and get acceptable results, whereas with the 77d I never really liked going over 6400, even though it'd go more. I still use the 77d when I really need more reach as the 1.6x crop is better than a teleconverter. The images might not be as close/zoomed in as the 77d due to less reach, but I get way way more keepers with the R6.
Thanks, Florián. I'm travelling at the moment but when I get back to the hotel I'll try to give you some amazon links. Lots of people ask this question actually so I think I will do a review on all my camo clothing soon 🙂
Thanks, Florián. I have now added amazon links to all the camo clothing I wore in the description of the video. The clothes are also available from the UK store chain Go Outdoors (but not the baseball cap). The gloves are from Dectahlon and I have provided the link to the product on their website.
The focus pulsing is not a Sigma issue, it's a Canon and their policy issue. The Sigma performs great on my 7D Mark II with absolutely no focus pulsing.
Hi Tsvetan, thanks for your comment. The pulsing only affects Canon mirrorless bodies. The 7D mkii you have is not mirrorless. My 77d, 100d and 5d are also not affected by the pulsing.
Great information mate, thanks. I’m still using my 7D Mk2 coupled with a mark 1 100-400L lens and the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary. I’ve been wondering about getting a mirrorless body but still not sure which way to go to be honest, so all of this is good stuff for me to absorb while I ponder if I should stick with what I’ve got and see if Canon open up to 3rd party lens manufacturers
For me, it was the focussing and sharpness of the mirrorless bodys that made the difference, because they focus direct from the sensor there's no micro out of focus lens adjustments that are needed. Having said that I came from a conusmer level 77d (and 100d!) whereas I belive the foussing you have in your 7d2 is vastly superior to what I had. I reckon your best bet in honesty is to track someone down who has made the jump from the 7d2 to mirrorless to get a proper view.
@@wildphil FWIW, I was shooting with the 7DII prior to switching over to the R-series MILC bodies, using (among others) the Sigma 150-600c. The difference in focusing is significant. However, one has to be careful how the R-series bodies are set up for focus. I use single-point focus and single point metering, in association with BBF and BBMetering. I use eye tracking along with servo mode, so that if I hold down the BBF button the camera will track a subject's eye continuously across the frame, but for a more static subject, I just press and release the BBF button, and the focus stays locked. I also use high speed mechanical shutter and this, along with the focusing setup does not, for me, exhibit pulsing. Without doubt, the RF lenses are more attune to the R-series bodies, but I have not been driven to give up the Sigma 150-600c or 60-600s, even though I have the RF 100-500.
@@trevor9934 Thanks, Trevor. I use exactly the same focussing setup with the exception I shoot on electronic silent - the rolling shutter is less of an issue for my needs and I find the 12 bit images vs the 14 bit images perfetly fine for my needs. Interested to hear that you don't have any pulsing with the mechanical shutter - I'll have to give that a try.
Interestingly, though the lack of the need for micro adjustments was a selling point for me as well, I have since gotten emails from Canon offering to do micro adjustments on my mirrorless bodies and lens combinations (for a fee). I find this odd, if no such adjustments are ever needed! I have a feeling that micro adjustments will return in future mirrorless bodies, based on this. They wouldn't offer them if it wasn't an issue in at least some bodies....would they?
Hmm, no idea, Alan. That's a new one on me I have to confess. Never heard of micro adjustments for mirrorless bodies, only DSLRs. Everyday is a school day, eh!
Well done Phil for putting it together, it was a bit of a marathon watch and had to do it in shifts. I am still old school with DSLr and don’t get the issues with my sigma 10-600 C . I chose the sigma due to its relatively lighter weight and hand hold ability and obvious price point. Nice Capture with the shorty.
Hi Martin. Thanks for your comment. Yeah, it definately ended up as a longer video than I wanted! I need to get better and making shorter ones, although so far it seems to be my best performing video after 24 hours, but maybe that's down to the subject content. I still think the Sigma is a great lens.
never had a problem to dont strap the lens ... on my R6mk2 or my R7 ... i had the sigma before but was too slow ... i love the rf 100-500 m so better ! thanks you for youre video !
Phil, just stumbled upon your channel. Your comparison is timely. I have the 100-400 ef L is version 2, but am thinking of the canon as a way to get a bit more reach, a bit more acuity and a bit lighter carry weight. I’m using it on an R7. Would considering that particular camera sway your conclusions on these two lenses in any way? I know, maybe an unfair question. But i’m about to buy so thought i’d ask. Thanks much.
Thanks for the comment, Craig. It's a tough one for me to answer as I've no personal experience of the R7 or the 100-400 lens. But I will say that, for me, to spend around £3000 on the RF 100-500 to get an extra 100mm of reach and lose 2/3rd stop of light seems like quite a high price to pay in my opinion when you already have an aledgely very good lens to get you to 400mm. I don't know what type of photography you shoot and in which conditions but I'd probably be inclined to try an EF 1.4x mkiii extender with your EF 100-400 lens which I think would take it to f8? I think if you were to pick up the Sigma, yes you'd get an extra 200mm which is not to be sniffed at at all, but you may find the images might not be as sharp as your 100-400 at a guess - you can overcome it by just making sure you shoot lot of images to get a sharp one, but of course that may not always be possible to do. I think your best bet is to hire that combo or find someone that can lend you it to try first in an ideal world.
I have an R5 and the RF 100-400/5.6-8.0 and the 800/11, and I get excellent results with both. Although a faster aperture would be great, the main thing I'm missing on my lenses is the weather resistance. I've thought about adapting a Sigma or Tamron 150-600(I get good results with a Tamron 70-200/2.8 G2), but I think I just need to save up the money and get the native 100-500. Thanks for making this video.
Thanks for the comment, Brent. If you have an R5 I would suspect the newer native Canon RF enses would resolve better than the Sigma given you have such a high density of megapixels.
Comprehensive review Phil, thanks so much! I think I’ve made my mind up - I would normally avoid fully extending the Sigma to 600mm anyway to ensure no loss of sharpness. I also would stop it down too for the same reason. Everything I’m reading about the Canon 100-500 says its tack sharp through full focal length and doesn’t need the aperture stopped down either. So in terms of aperture range and focal length they seem comparable. I’m the same as you, I just wish the bloody thing wasn’t visible from space 😂 Ive seen mixed reviews on those neoprene sleeves and had considered a permanent solution such as cerakote camo, but this would significantly impact on resale value and maybe also infringe on warranty. Any other thoughts on camming the thing up?
Thanks, mate. Got to confess my copy of the lens has always been fine fully extended but I have heard stories of them varying by individual copy. I see you've since commented on the lens covet review but yeah, even if they were black like the other L lenses that would be a lot better I think
I have a Sigma 150-600mm Sport and the RF100-500mm. Used on the Canon R5 and R3, the Sigma does not work very well at all with these cameras. The hunting and breathing is excessive and has made the Sigma completely useless. As stated by Canon that 3rd party lenses are not supported by the RF mount.
I think you might have some issue with your Camera body or settings. I have Sigma 150-600mm sports as well as Canon 100-400 ii ef, both work very well with R5, R6, R7, R10, R, RP. Yes, I have all these bodies. However, my favourite is R6 as it is so easy to get sharp shots, almost effortlessly. Probably due to lower mega pixels, it is more forgiving on shutter speed.
Interesting comparison video and an actual practical, in the field one. What great access you have to owls as well. They're very hit and miss where I am, depending on the season and from year to year. If you're looking for a means to carry the lens by a strap, have a look at the BlackRapid sling. I use it for mine and it's perfect. You also mention Canon opening up their lens mount. I believe they are looking at doing that for a few manufactures - possibly Sigma. It's the same thing they did for the EF mount originally. A lot of people forget, you don't have to get a big prime brand new. A used 600mm f4 lens Mk1 will cost the same as the 100-500 or the 500mm f4 with a converter. The latter is what I used but ended up selling it when I got the Canon zoom as I didn't use it anymore. I miss the f4 sometimes but the lightness and portability of the zoom is great not to mention its fast focusing, sharpness. IS and minimum focusing distance, more than made up for it.
Thanks, Frank. Ha, the owls aren't always as accessible as my videos might make them look! Thanks for the tip on the black rapid, I'll take a look. I still do have a used prime lens on my list, I definately think it's going to have to be a used one!
The Canon firmware is a pain, it defocuses third party lenses. I have the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 which is fantastic on the 5D4, even the R6, but totally sucks with the R5. As you mentioned the 150-600 pulses, so the best thing I have found is to use the 5D4 or 7D2 DSLR with the Sigma lenses. As it is pretty impossible to use Sigma on the R5 I bought a s/h Canon 100-400Lii which is just as good as the RF lens, lust lacking 100mm, I paid £1200 when the RF lens is £2700. Not contest. Incidentally I did a YT video comparing the 100-400Lii with the Sigma 50-500mm and found it was hard to distinguish between them. [see my channel id curious]
Thanks, mate. I just wonder if your 120-300 is not so great on the R5, do you think that's down to the optic resolving power of the lens, what wth the R6 and 5D4 having fewer megapixels than the R5?
@@wildphil according to DXOmark, that lens was the best [sharpest] zoom they had tested. I bought it after I decided not to get the 100-400Lii, then went to Spain. When I got back I had to throw away most of my bird images, unsharp. I did another YT video, th-cam.com/video/mhkHYnvk0L8/w-d-xo.html Sigma and the Canon R5, it can take excellent images, usually about 1 in 5. That is why I think it is firmware, like the pulsing on the 150-600. I am thinking about doing a video about that, only I am off to Spain again in a couple of weeks. It is easy enough to put a line in the firmware instructing the camera to shift focus, then you will think about buying Canon lenses, like the new 100-300 f2.8, only not at £11,500. I know what you mean about pixels, which is why I don't think it is necessary to get an R7, but it isn't a little, it is a lot.
OK mate, thanks for letting me know. This is actually the only 3rd party lens I own. In a simialr manner I know Sony will also downrate the fps om 3rd party lenses.
I have trouble justifying the price for the 100-500 when Nikon can offer a 180-600 that is FASTER at the long end (6.3-7.1), which let's face it, is the end most of us care about, and 100mm longer, for a thousand dollars less! That's tough to swallow.
Hi Alan, thanks for your comment. At the time of the video the Nikon lens wasn't out, but yes it does look like a very good buy, in fact I think for Wildlife Nikon have arguably one of the best line-ups of lenses at the moment. I still think Canon wins on bodies though, but those are just my thoughts alone!
Using the sigma on my Nikons and I have not that issue. Since a lens is not much more then optics plus a focus motor I think the Canon cameras are just obstructing the Sigma. There is only one solution. Buy Canon glass for 3x to 10x the price.
Thanks for your comment, Michael. It's a shame for us Canon users that this pulsing exists and also there are no 3rd party lenses (at the time of writing). Thanks for letting us know the Nikon cameras don't suffer from it - I was actually just wondering if Nikon and Sony were also affected.
great video, I own the sigma and have great super sharp images. pulsing does happen, but if you shoot enough you do get great quality. I own the sigma 1.4 converter and don't notice any difference in sharpness.
Thanks, Phil. Yeah, exactly 100 percent, if you shoot enough pictures, you'll get good quality ones. Thanks for letting me know about the Sigma 1.4 teleconverter sharpness. That's great info for anyone else watching 👍
Hi Phil Beighton, you might have been notified of a reply to your comment by another user. Having just read it, it was deliberately nasty and vindictive so I've banned the user from the channel and removed their comment. I hope all is well with you.
@@wildphil yeah great mate, didn’t see the comment thanks though.
The best upgrade you can buy for this lens is the Leofoto CFC-01 lens foot .It has ARCA-SWISS and its very good to handheld . There is also a strap available from Leofoto with quick release system for this lensfoot.
Thanks very much. That's good info. The Leofoto stuff wasn't on my radar until you mentioned it 👍
@@wildphil With pleasure !
As someone with a sigma 150-600 and looking at the RF100-500 for an upgrade - this video is perfect. Thanks for the video!
You're very welcome, Ian
Forgot to say I enjoy your videos 👏🏾👏🏾
Thank you, Tyrone 👍
Great video! I actualy some time ago concider the sigma to my R5 but i ended up with the EF 100-400 4,5-5,6L mkII. But i pulled the trigger on the RF100-500 few days ago. Its expected to arrive next tuesday. After watching this video im even more excited. Happy New Year 🎉
Happy New Year! Thanks for the comment. I've never used the EF 100-400 but I'm sure you'll be very happy with the focus speed and sharpness of the 100-500.
@@wildphil pulled the trigger on the 100-500 and it was a step up. So happy with the upgrade
Excellent video. Much appreciated.
You're very welcome, Justo 👍
Very good video, thanks.
Thank you :-)
nice one Phil, I'll be keeping an eye on what your doing with that lens...
thanks, mate. Early days - love the sharpness but harder to get blury backgrounds.
The rf 100 500 is miles away better even from the Sport version of that Sigma. It's sharp at wide open any time, the Sigma has to be at f8 to be potentially very sharp, on my pretentious R7.. I own them both, just a few days ago got the RF. Not even mentioning the af speed anc accuracy, and the way better stabiliser, way closer minimum focusing distance. It's definitely is worth the effort to get the RF.
Thanks for your comment, Cris. I've not used the Sigma on the R7 yet although I've just bought one! I find on the R6 f6.3 wide open is fine but it could just be my individual copy of the lens - plus the extra light the full frame senso lets in. I'll have to get it a try on the R7 and see how it performs.
Great video
Thank you 😊
You might want to look into the Alpha Guard skins for that white lens.
Thanks, Basil. I've since bought a Lenscoat cover. Actually there;s a reveiw of it on the channel, but it's good to know that brand exists as I hadn't heard of them before, thank you :-)
Hi Phil: I have just stumbled upon your channel and am glad to see a comparison between these two lenses, both of which I own, along with the Sigma 60-600s and the EF 100-400MkII. I am a retired professional wildlife photographer with about 42 years of experience, and currently I shoot with the 5DsR, R5, R6 and R6MkII. My wildlife subjects vary from macro mammals of North American, to small birds in deep bush where I currently am in NZ.
I must admit I am very careful with my gear, and simply encase the Sigma 150-600c in a plastic cover and, so far, have found no dust or moisture encroachment with the Sigma 150-600c. The RF 100-500 has massive weather sealing, like all L series lenses, so I would have no reservations about the extension of the lens.
I personally have found no pulsing issues with my cameras: however, I don't use electronic shutter and find that those who use that seem to have more issues with pulsing - I would rather have fewer images that were sharp than lots of images with a bunch of soft ones. Most folks experiencing that seem to do so on the R7, which I my own investigations indicate is not as good a focusing system as the FF bodies I have. Also, a LOT depends on how the focusing of the R-series bodies is configured: it's not just a simple changeover from the DSLRs - these are much more sophisticated. The RF 100-500 had dual Nano-USM motors that make it blazing fast to focus.
I have no issues with the circular clutch of the EF-L lenses - I have been used to it with the 28-300L, 100-400 MkI and MkII, and my RF 100-500 locks solidly and allows the lens to be locked at any focal length. I saw you trying to lock the clutch with gloves and my own experience is that this does not work well. I don't think the design itself is flawed per se, but there are cases of individual units needing adjustment and Canon service have dealt with those under warranty.
All that said, your results are not unreasonable in terms of relative sharpness but, as you say, one also has to consider the difference in market and price. The Sigma 150-600c is an enthusiasts' lens and is priced accordingly. The RF 100-500L is a professional-grade lens that demands a significantly higher investment. Over here in NZ, the prices are: $1,400 and $5,400 respectively - so the Canon is almost four times the price.
Hi Trevor, thanks very much for your comment and I must apologise for the length of time it has taken for me to reply - I've been traveling abroad. Its great to know that as a professional you have confidence in the weather sealing of the 100-500. I tend to use case 2 for most of my focusing needs but I'm open to hearing about which modes work well for others. I prefer the RF lens for sharpness hut I must admit I do miss the extra 100mm of the Sigma, not just for the outright reach but also the extra buy of blury background that the zoom compression brings.
@@wildphil Thanks for responding Phil. Frankly when I address the need for gear, among others, I ask the following questions:
What is the budget? An obvious limitation that needs to be held to.
What subjects? That has a significant impact of lens type, and to a degree sensor size.
What is the intended output? Of all the question, this one is rarely asked but arguably is the most critical. The investment required to generate high resolution, large Fine Art prints for sale is going to much greater than for someone generating images for digital display, or more so, for posting on the web - given many sites, especially social media, massively downsize the images for posting.
This is particularly apropos to the dilemma you posed in your response. I have no issue using the Sigma 150-600c or 60-600s because I am not in the business of Fine Art production, and the availability of PP software like Topaz AI, Denoise, or Sharpen can make all the difference on top of apps like PS and LR. That is where one has to consider the balance of budget vs output and technique and a clinical analysis can be very revealing.
I just purchased the 100-00mm for my R5. You have inspired me. Thank you!
Congratulations! It's a great all round go-to lens. Nice and sharp! 👍
Thank you for a very informative video! I own the Sigma 150-600 and just rented the Canon 100-500. I'm thinking of upgrading but not sure. I'm going on vacation next week and will use them both and compare the results. Videos like this are very helpful when trying to make these decisions. Keep up the good work!
Thank you, you're very welcome. If it helps, where I live in the UK there are a few retailers that will refund the lens rental fee if you end up buying it, so it's worth looking out for that sort of deal if you're seriously considering purchasing one.
Nice video and information. My Usagear shoulder strap connecter screws into the bottom screw hole on each lenses tripod foot.
Thanks, Forrest. I think I'll look up usagear and see what they've got. I can also screw the peak design strap into the tripod foot, it's just I prefer to leave that free for a mounitng plate etc.
I had the sigma before I got my R6. I had it on a 7Dmkii. When I got the R6 I didn't miss the 1.5 crop effect of the 7Dmkii because the R6 has a better sensor and focusing system so I was getting more "keepers" with the new set up. I mainly photograph birds and birds in flight. At closer distances the Sigma focusing pulse was apparent (but not always) and I did miss some shots because of it. There were other occasions when the camera and lens thought the shot was in focus and back home you saw it wasn't. After a lot of thought I upgraded to the RF100-500. It was a huge amount of money on top of an upgraded body. Wow it was worth it. Yes the tripod foot is not as good. I used to carry my sigma and camera on a cross chest sling as I walked about. Now I just carry the new set up in my hand with a wrist strap as a back up. It is so much lighter. I tighten the zoom when walking about sometimes to stop it slipping out and it works. You are right about the balance of the Sigma especially when moved out from the body due to the RF converter. The slower aperture of the 100-500 only comes into play round about 450mm (?). I think the loss of 600mm is barely noticed as the image quality is so much better in the RF and I can crop a little more to make up for it. I was thinking of going for a large 2nd hand EF prime but decided I need the flexibility of a zoom if I'm paying out so much money. As long as someone is aware of the focusing issues before they use the Sigma with an RF mount I think it is great value for money compared to other alternatives.
mate, that's spot on. Pretty much summed it up perfectly there. I too have found that the extra sharpness helps you crop in that little bit more too!
Namaste Phill which Canon full frame body to which telephoto lens is enough to buy . Or else mirror less or mirror full frame body . Sigma or Tamron . Which gears are better than which gears & best for wildlife or Birding
HI Jayanth. I've never used the Tamron lenses so I cannot give you advice on them. I've only every sued Canon, so I can only talk about the Canon system, in which I find the full frame cameras of the R6 (mki and ii), R5, R3, R8 etc focus faster than APSC-crop of the R7 which I have recntly bought (in fact I plan to do a video on that soon). I have never used the EOS R or RP but as you probably want Animal Eye AF, your cheapest options are probable the R8 or R6 mki - or an R7 with the crop, but the R7 focus speed is slower in my experience due to the smaller sensor. Hope this helps.
Thank you for comparing these lenses. Happy hunting with your camera! Regards!
You're very welcome 👍. Same to you!
I am using Canon R5C and Sigma 24-70 lens. How do I change the aperture on the Sigma lens using the aperture ring on the lens? It is not doing anything. I have to use the Canon R5 screen or dial button.
Hi there. Thanks for the comment. The control ring to change the aperture is only available on Canon RF lenses. The ring you refer to on the Sigma I belive is the focus ring for manual focus of the lens.
Dude, you're all camo'ed up, but the big white lens!
yeah, exactly. I make reference to it in the video actually.The lens was brand new and I hadn't yet decided which cover to buy. I've since bought one from Lenscoat and also reviewed it. Video in the channel.
The holes in the lens mount are setup to use as a connection point for a carry strap....
Which camera are you using in this video please? Apologies if I’ve just missed it
Canon R6 (the original mk1)
Check out Duade Paton's channel. He has a video on some (member provided) settings for the Sigma lens and the R series camera that will really help with the pulsing.
Thanks, Basil. I actually made reference to Duade's channel on this, and its linked in the description below.
@@wildphil Ahha - Not sure how I missed that.
@@basilbcf no worries, it's a long video! Haha
Had the Sigma 150-600 C and just purchased the Canon RF100-500 and honestly the Canon is leaps & bounds better than the Sigma. Zero regrets, purchased used in like new condition. Razor sharp.
Congratulations on the new lens. I'm sure you'll love it !
Found your video very interesting and informative. I myself enjoy Wildlife photography as an amateur and I own the EF 300mm 2.8f mk II prime with a 2 times converter and find the images to be superb, however, unless you have big muscles this combination is heavy going. I am looking at getting a lens for my R5 and going lite. After watching your video I am impressed with the results. Great video and subbed your channel. 👍😊
Thanks, Kim. 300mm f2.8 - nice!!!
Also, I assume you kept the Cannon lens, can you give us any updates on your thoughts about differences between the two? As you've used them more, have the differences become more noticeable?
Yeah, so for me there are 2 things the Sigma does well. Firstly reach, don't underestimate that extra 100mm especially when put on a crop sensor for the extra reach - also the Sigma gives more blurry nice backgrounds due to the extra 100mm zoom compression. The 100 to 500 is more likely to get you the sharp shot if speed is important and you won't get many chances, it's also awesome to walk around with due to smaller and lighter size, in fact I clip it to a peak design capture clip on my backpack strap and can walk around with it all day - no way is that comfortable with the Sigma.
@@wildphilI assume u use the lens kit from peak design as well? Also do u think it’s worth to get the V3 capture clip?
Lastly RF lenses are still crazily priced so as such I’m still using my Holy trinity EF lenses. Wonder when would it drop in price
@@AKSKMY yeah, I use the V3 capture clip. I even use it with the 100-500 lens.
Hi Phil, I wanted to ask you a question, why did you choose sigma c and not that sport? I'm a bit undecided about sigma sport, contemporary, tamron 150-600g2... I have a canon reflex. thanks and congratulations for the video
Thanka Diego. I have never used the sport, but for me it was price. Also the Contemporary was lighter. At the time I watched many reviews and I concluded the optical performance was similar. I am told the build quality is better on the sport and it has weather sealing, but its more expensive.
@@wildphil Yes, I too did a search yesterday evening, actually the contemporary is almost similar, even having the same focus motor and faster because the sport has more groups of lenses to move, plus it seems that the contemporary is resistant to dust and water, in the end the sport does not fully justify an outlay of €600. Thanks again🙏
@Phil Law Wildlife Photography I have used both contemporary and sports versions. At the end kept sports and sold contemporary. Sports is quite heavy, however auto focus performance is considerably better than contemporary. Also sports is very sharp wide open at f6.3 @ 600mm. For contemporary, you need to stop down to f8.0 @ 600mm to get same sharpness.
Thanks for the video. I can definitely relate to this. I have an R6 and have just sold my sigma 150-600 contemporary. It was ok but I mostly image low level aircraft and the autofocus was "ok" but a struggle at times. Where I go 450mm to 550mm full frame is ideal so I've taken the plunge and literally just ordered the rf 100-500. Hoping for improved af and I think the IQ will be a bit better as well.
Thanks for the comment, Neil. You'll definately notice more sharper shots and improved AF speed!
Could you comment on switching from a crop sensor 77D vs the full frame R6? I'm considering getting a R6 M2 from an 80D but am concerned about loss of magnification without the crop sensor.
I’ve been looking at this myself and was seriously considering the R7 to get more megapixels on target and more reach however the shutter shock on the R7 is terrible, forcing us to use the electronic shutter which doesn’t have a great readout speed.
I’m on the R5 for the resolution, faster electronic shutter readout speed and 4k 120fps, which is useful to me.
I was worried about the same thing when making that choice, actually. So I kept the 77D. But I always default to the R6, due to focus accuracy and sharpness of the mirrorless body vs the viewfinder in the 77d, the frame rate (I shoot 20fps electronic (I gather then R6 mkii is even faster!), silently for wildlife, a massively largely buffer too and for me the vastly superior high ISO performance. Not through choice, but I'll shoot up to 25,600 ISO with the R6 and then denoise the images and get acceptable results, whereas with the 77d I never really liked going over 6400, even though it'd go more. I still use the 77d when I really need more reach as the 1.6x crop is better than a teleconverter. The images might not be as close/zoomed in as the 77d due to less reach, but I get way way more keepers with the R6.
I'm looking at the R7 actually as a 2nd body to replace my 77d. I didn't relaise the R7 had a slower readabout speed. Good to know that, thank you!
@@wildphil I have the r7 and love it. But, I don't shot professional work and it is just a hobby for me.
You can always 1.6 crop on the 100mm 500mm 👍🏾
Thanks. You can. Actually you can also do that with the Sigma too I belive, provided it is mounted to a mirrorless canon body.
Whats that camo clothes? Can i find it somewhere? Thanks :)
Thanks, Florián. I'm travelling at the moment but when I get back to the hotel I'll try to give you some amazon links. Lots of people ask this question actually so I think I will do a review on all my camo clothing soon 🙂
Thanks, Florián. I have now added amazon links to all the camo clothing I wore in the description of the video. The clothes are also available from the UK store chain Go Outdoors (but not the baseball cap). The gloves are from Dectahlon and I have provided the link to the product on their website.
@@wildphil Many thanks, i really appreciate it!
The focus pulsing is not a Sigma issue, it's a Canon and their policy issue. The Sigma performs great on my 7D Mark II with absolutely no focus pulsing.
Hi Tsvetan, thanks for your comment. The pulsing only affects Canon mirrorless bodies. The 7D mkii you have is not mirrorless. My 77d, 100d and 5d are also not affected by the pulsing.
Great information mate, thanks. I’m still using my 7D Mk2 coupled with a mark 1 100-400L lens and the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary. I’ve been wondering about getting a mirrorless body but still not sure which way to go to be honest, so all of this is good stuff for me to absorb while I ponder if I should stick with what I’ve got and see if Canon open up to 3rd party lens manufacturers
For me, it was the focussing and sharpness of the mirrorless bodys that made the difference, because they focus direct from the sensor there's no micro out of focus lens adjustments that are needed. Having said that I came from a conusmer level 77d (and 100d!) whereas I belive the foussing you have in your 7d2 is vastly superior to what I had. I reckon your best bet in honesty is to track someone down who has made the jump from the 7d2 to mirrorless to get a proper view.
@@wildphil FWIW, I was shooting with the 7DII prior to switching over to the R-series MILC bodies, using (among others) the Sigma 150-600c. The difference in focusing is significant. However, one has to be careful how the R-series bodies are set up for focus.
I use single-point focus and single point metering, in association with BBF and BBMetering. I use eye tracking along with servo mode, so that if I hold down the BBF button the camera will track a subject's eye continuously across the frame, but for a more static subject, I just press and release the BBF button, and the focus stays locked. I also use high speed mechanical shutter and this, along with the focusing setup does not, for me, exhibit pulsing. Without doubt, the RF lenses are more attune to the R-series bodies, but I have not been driven to give up the Sigma 150-600c or 60-600s, even though I have the RF 100-500.
@@trevor9934 Thanks, Trevor. I use exactly the same focussing setup with the exception I shoot on electronic silent - the rolling shutter is less of an issue for my needs and I find the 12 bit images vs the 14 bit images perfetly fine for my needs. Interested to hear that you don't have any pulsing with the mechanical shutter - I'll have to give that a try.
Interestingly, though the lack of the need for micro adjustments was a selling point for me as well, I have since gotten emails from Canon offering to do micro adjustments on my mirrorless bodies and lens combinations (for a fee). I find this odd, if no such adjustments are ever needed! I have a feeling that micro adjustments will return in future mirrorless bodies, based on this. They wouldn't offer them if it wasn't an issue in at least some bodies....would they?
Hmm, no idea, Alan. That's a new one on me I have to confess. Never heard of micro adjustments for mirrorless bodies, only DSLRs. Everyday is a school day, eh!
Well done Phil for putting it together, it was a bit of a marathon watch and had to do it in shifts. I am still old school with DSLr and don’t get the issues with my sigma 10-600 C . I chose the sigma due to its relatively lighter weight and hand hold ability and obvious price point. Nice Capture with the shorty.
Hi Martin. Thanks for your comment. Yeah, it definately ended up as a longer video than I wanted! I need to get better and making shorter ones, although so far it seems to be my best performing video after 24 hours, but maybe that's down to the subject content. I still think the Sigma is a great lens.
never had a problem to dont strap the lens ... on my R6mk2 or my R7 ... i had the sigma before but was too slow ... i love the rf 100-500 m so better ! thanks you for youre video !
Thanks, Jean Pierre. Maybe I need to trust the camera more to hold the weight of the lens. So far it has been fine 🙂
Phil, just stumbled upon your channel. Your comparison is timely. I have the 100-400 ef L is version 2, but am thinking of the canon as a way to get a bit more reach, a bit more acuity and a bit lighter carry weight. I’m using it on an R7. Would considering that particular camera sway your conclusions on these two lenses in any way? I know, maybe an unfair question. But i’m about to buy so thought i’d ask. Thanks much.
Thanks for the comment, Craig. It's a tough one for me to answer as I've no personal experience of the R7 or the 100-400 lens. But I will say that, for me, to spend around £3000 on the RF 100-500 to get an extra 100mm of reach and lose 2/3rd stop of light seems like quite a high price to pay in my opinion when you already have an aledgely very good lens to get you to 400mm. I don't know what type of photography you shoot and in which conditions but I'd probably be inclined to try an EF 1.4x mkiii extender with your EF 100-400 lens which I think would take it to f8? I think if you were to pick up the Sigma, yes you'd get an extra 200mm which is not to be sniffed at at all, but you may find the images might not be as sharp as your 100-400 at a guess - you can overcome it by just making sure you shoot lot of images to get a sharp one, but of course that may not always be possible to do. I think your best bet is to hire that combo or find someone that can lend you it to try first in an ideal world.
I have an R5 and the RF 100-400/5.6-8.0 and the 800/11, and I get excellent results with both. Although a faster aperture would be great, the main thing I'm missing on my lenses is the weather resistance. I've thought about adapting a Sigma or Tamron 150-600(I get good results with a Tamron 70-200/2.8 G2), but I think I just need to save up the money and get the native 100-500. Thanks for making this video.
Thanks for the comment, Brent. If you have an R5 I would suspect the newer native Canon RF enses would resolve better than the Sigma given you have such a high density of megapixels.
Comprehensive review Phil, thanks so much!
I think I’ve made my mind up - I would normally avoid fully extending the Sigma to 600mm anyway to ensure no loss of sharpness. I also would stop it down too for the same reason. Everything I’m reading about the Canon 100-500 says its tack sharp through full focal length and doesn’t need the aperture stopped down either. So in terms of aperture range and focal length they seem comparable.
I’m the same as you, I just wish the bloody thing wasn’t visible from space 😂 Ive seen mixed reviews on those neoprene sleeves and had considered a permanent solution such as cerakote camo, but this would significantly impact on resale value and maybe also infringe on warranty. Any other thoughts on camming the thing up?
Thanks, mate. Got to confess my copy of the lens has always been fine fully extended but I have heard stories of them varying by individual copy. I see you've since commented on the lens covet review but yeah, even if they were black like the other L lenses that would be a lot better I think
nice info, however background music is destracting
Thanks for the feedback
Firmware 1.8.1 fix the Sigma 150-600mm pulsing issue on the R5.
Thanks for the comment. I'll have to give it a try on the R6.
are you interested in joining in on one of the livestreams I do?
Thank you for the offer, mate. Im not really a livestream type of guy. Good luck with it though.👍
I have a Sigma 150-600mm Sport and the RF100-500mm. Used on the Canon R5 and R3, the Sigma does not work very well at all with these cameras. The hunting and breathing is excessive and has made the Sigma completely useless. As stated by Canon that 3rd party lenses are not supported by the RF mount.
Thanks for the feedback. The Contemporay works OK, with the R6 at least. It can hunt a bit in low light, but overall useable.
I think you might have some issue with your Camera body or settings. I have Sigma 150-600mm sports as well as Canon 100-400 ii ef, both work very well with R5, R6, R7, R10, R, RP. Yes, I have all these bodies. However, my favourite is R6 as it is so easy to get sharp shots, almost effortlessly. Probably due to lower mega pixels, it is more forgiving on shutter speed.
Interesting comparison video and an actual practical, in the field one. What great access you have to owls as well. They're very hit and miss where I am, depending on the season and from year to year.
If you're looking for a means to carry the lens by a strap, have a look at the BlackRapid sling. I use it for mine and it's perfect. You also mention Canon opening up their lens mount. I believe they are looking at doing that for a few manufactures - possibly Sigma. It's the same thing they did for the EF mount originally.
A lot of people forget, you don't have to get a big prime brand new. A used 600mm f4 lens Mk1 will cost the same as the 100-500 or the 500mm f4 with a converter. The latter is what I used but ended up selling it when I got the Canon zoom as I didn't use it anymore. I miss the f4 sometimes but the lightness and portability of the zoom is great not to mention its fast focusing, sharpness. IS and minimum focusing distance, more than made up for it.
Thanks, Frank. Ha, the owls aren't always as accessible as my videos might make them look! Thanks for the tip on the black rapid, I'll take a look. I still do have a used prime lens on my list, I definately think it's going to have to be a used one!
I am right there with ya! Canon needs to open things up.
If they do, it might just stop me switching.
The Canon firmware is a pain, it defocuses third party lenses. I have the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 which is fantastic on the 5D4, even the R6, but totally sucks with the R5. As you mentioned the 150-600 pulses, so the best thing I have found is to use the 5D4 or 7D2 DSLR with the Sigma lenses. As it is pretty impossible to use Sigma on the R5 I bought a s/h Canon 100-400Lii which is just as good as the RF lens, lust lacking 100mm, I paid £1200 when the RF lens is £2700. Not contest. Incidentally I did a YT video comparing the 100-400Lii with the Sigma 50-500mm and found it was hard to distinguish between them. [see my channel id curious]
Thanks, mate. I just wonder if your 120-300 is not so great on the R5, do you think that's down to the optic resolving power of the lens, what wth the R6 and 5D4 having fewer megapixels than the R5?
@@wildphil according to DXOmark, that lens was the best [sharpest] zoom they had tested. I bought it after I decided not to get the 100-400Lii, then went to Spain. When I got back I had to throw away most of my bird images, unsharp. I did another YT video, th-cam.com/video/mhkHYnvk0L8/w-d-xo.html Sigma and the Canon R5, it can take excellent images, usually about 1 in 5. That is why I think it is firmware, like the pulsing on the 150-600. I am thinking about doing a video about that, only I am off to Spain again in a couple of weeks. It is easy enough to put a line in the firmware instructing the camera to shift focus, then you will think about buying Canon lenses, like the new 100-300 f2.8, only not at £11,500. I know what you mean about pixels, which is why I don't think it is necessary to get an R7, but it isn't a little, it is a lot.
OK mate, thanks for letting me know. This is actually the only 3rd party lens I own. In a simialr manner I know Sony will also downrate the fps om 3rd party lenses.
I have trouble justifying the price for the 100-500 when Nikon can offer a 180-600 that is FASTER at the long end (6.3-7.1), which let's face it, is the end most of us care about, and 100mm longer, for a thousand dollars less! That's tough to swallow.
Hi Alan, thanks for your comment. At the time of the video the Nikon lens wasn't out, but yes it does look like a very good buy, in fact I think for Wildlife Nikon have arguably one of the best line-ups of lenses at the moment. I still think Canon wins on bodies though, but those are just my thoughts alone!
Using the sigma on my Nikons and I have not that issue. Since a lens is not much more then optics plus a focus motor I think the Canon cameras are just obstructing the Sigma. There is only one solution. Buy Canon glass for 3x to 10x the price.
Thanks for your comment, Michael. It's a shame for us Canon users that this pulsing exists and also there are no 3rd party lenses (at the time of writing). Thanks for letting us know the Nikon cameras don't suffer from it - I was actually just wondering if Nikon and Sony were also affected.
Terrible sound, why talk if your can't be heard?