I am in the process of getting a telephoto zoom lens and need advise.
I shoot Sony full frame. I am considering the Tamron 70-300 vs the Sigma 100-400 both made for Sony e mount.
The reason i am looking to get a telephoto lens is to be able to introduce variations to my landscape images (currently i run a 24-105 together with a fast 35 and 20 mm lenses ).
I also love photographing full moon rises and sets.
The price is almost double for the sigma and the weight as well. I looked at the reviews and in terms of IQ they seem to be at par (or so i gathered from the videos)
I wonder if anyone here has experience with these lenses for e mount and or if anyone has advise regarding the extra 100 mm reach vs lack of it.
While I don’t have experience of these two lenses specifically, one thing that comes to mind is close focus distance. I have a 100-300 and a 100-400 and like you say, the size and weight that comes with that extra 100mm is noticeable. The close focus distance is, too. So for certain things like dragonflies and butterflies, I like the 100-300 since I don’t have to be far from them. It’s a difference of about 5 feet between the two lenses. So if you plan to do more than just landscape slices it’s something to consider.
That makes sense thanks Kris
Another thing to keep in mind when choosing a telephot zoom is weight. I have a Canon 100-400 which is a fabulous lens but it is a beast, so when walking any distance when carrying my camera and other lenses I often leave it and use take my 70-200 with a 1.4 extender. Also it is too heavy to use without a tripod for any legnth of time.
I think the sigma is less weight than the Canon L lens
It comes in at 2.5 lb
But that 70-300 tamron is 1.2 lb so relative to that it is much more but over all compared to other brand name 100-400 lenses it is lighter
Last year i bought a Tamron 100-400 and i tested the Canon 100-400 mk2 and i can say that the diference is almost unnoticeable, mainly considering the price diference. The canon maybe a bit sharper on the corners, but the Tamrom is good enough, lighter and smaller, and when hiking that makes a diference too.
I thing the Sigma and Tamron are equivalent but i chose the Tamron because it accepts a tripod colar and, when i bought it, it was some 50 or 60€ cheaper.
I can say that at the moment it is my go to lens, and the one i have more fun with.
I recently rented a 100-400 as a bit of a trial run. I will be getting one, the question is do I go with the Sigma 100-400 or the Sony GM 100-400. This is just my short experience, but well over 1/2 of my images were taken at +300 mm. My assumption is that if you have it, you will use it, if you don’t have it…you will probably wish you did. Now, weight is not a consideration for me, I never really hike super far and I didn’t feel like it was a struggle. I walked around for a whole day with it on a strap at a zoo and it never bothered me once. Just my 2 cents, I would go with the 100-400 if the quality is similar, I will not be considering a 70-200 or 70-300 as a result of this rental.