Wait for Sigma 16-300 or just buy the RF 100-400?

[green0460]

Hello! Just for context I have an EOS R50 The said sigma lens which should be out by May could potentially replace my 18-150 and I really like the idea of a 2x farther zoom than what I have plus the ability to go even wider. However I also want a dedicated telephoto lens and I’m fine with maybe giving up 100mm of zoom for the Sigma versatility. The only thing that has me on the fence is the possibility that the Sigma won’t maintain good quality on either end of the zoom spectrum. What do you guys think?

[shadowsports]

Greetings ,

It's nearly impossible to speculate on something that doesn't exist.  Sigma does have a good reputation, but going with Cannon glass is always your best bet.  I've owned a lot of sigma glass  over the years, and have been very happy.  I've since fully transitioned to Canon.  I have never regretted this decision.  I also own the RF100-400 and once again can say that I have no regrets.

[ebiggs1]

Always, always go Canon RF if you can and it does what you need.

[March411]

green0460 I currently own the Sigma 18-300mm F3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM | C and the Canon RF100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM. Personally I am a big fan of the EF 18-300mm, the IQ is pretty impressive for a "super zoom", it produces a real nice color balance and it's extremely versatile when traveling. 

I will be trading my EF18-300mm in for the 16-300mm when the lens is released so that I have it in the native RF mount. Best I can tell from published sources it that it is expected to be available beginning April 17.

Here is a pretty objective review: Hands-on Sigma 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7  

If I had to pick one I would be pretty hard pressed. I do enjoy a faster lens because I do shoot a fair amount of low light and the Sigma gives you a little over a stop. Both are light weight and a very easy all day carry on the R50. The RF100-400mm for it's price point produces incredible images, it will offer you more range if that's what your after but you lose the possibilities on the wide end.

Personally the application for either lens is so different for my style of photography. If I think I am going to want reach and have the versatility to go wide I grab the Sigma, if I am going on a hike and capture some wildlife it's the 100-400mm.

So the bottom line is, I'm really no help and would buy both ;o)  If it helps I bought the Sigma before the Canon. If I was starting from scratch I would do the same thing. The extra speed and versatility is something I look for in a travel lens.

Here is an image of the Sigma mounted on the R50, playing with the macro

f11 @ 1/640

And when bouncing around a small village in Italy

Mounted on the M50 in Mexico

This is the 100-400mm but it's mounted on my R6MkII in some real low light

[Newshutterfly]

Your photos are gorgeous!   I’m new and just got the EOS R50.   The lens that came with the camera has so little zoom and we are going on a big trip in a few months.   I want to get a new lens that will be an al purpose lens for travel.   I am brand new and learning photography, but to be honest will probably be shooting mostly in auto mode.   I’m considering the new release Sigma but I am wondering if using a non Cannon lens limits the functions of the camera in anyway?   

[ebiggs1]

"... I am wondering if using a non Cannon lens limits the functions of the camera in anyway?"

If it is not one of Sigma's RF lenses of course it will not be fully compatible because it will be an old design.

" I want to get a new lens that will be an al purpose lens for travel. "

There is no such lens. That is why cameras have interchangeable lenses because no single can do everything. Now you can certainly get something close but you always give up something to get something in photography. There is no free lunch. It does all depend on what you want and are good with. Plus how good you are with post editing like March411 obviously is.

[March411]

Not sure whether to take that as a dig or a compliment ebiggs.

Several of those images are right out of the camera, some have had post work but nothing outside the norm. Post work has always been a part of photography, many of us used filters, development times...burning and dodging to achieve what we believe is a beautiful finished product. I believe that is the goal for anyone interested in photography. You should stop being so angry Ernie.

Newshutterfly, first the compliment is appreciated! To some degree ebiggs is correct, one size doesn't fit all but one lens can give you a decent range to minimize what you have to carry in your bag. I just returned from a trip in Europe, brought three lenses but since we spent a lot of time hiking my RF24-240mm F4-6.3 IS USM did most of the heavy lifting. For this trip it ended up being an all in one lens but YMMV.

Any EF mount regardless of brand (including Canon) will not perform as well as an RF mount, ebiggs just forgot to mention that fact. RF lenses have a 12-pin connection to the camera, while EF lenses have 8 pins. This allows RF lenses to communicate with the camera faster and more efficiently. While using an EF lens on an EOS R system camera with an adapter you may experience some limitations to continuous shooting speed as the older communication protocols of the EF mount may result in the camera not being able to achieve its maximum burst rate.

I believe other then resizing this image it is out of camera.

[March411]

And the new RF 6-300mm F3.5-6.7 DC OS is an RF mount for APS-C camera's so it's performance will be on par with any of the Canon RF mount line. When released I will be picking one up, it's a little over one stop faster then the Canon RF100-400 but you loose 100mm in range. 

[March411]

No edit function but that should read: RF 16-300mm F3.5-6.7 DC OS is an RF mount for APS-C camera's.

A RF 6-300mm F3.5-6.7 DC OS would have some range ;o)

[ebiggs1]

"Not sure whether to take that as a dig or a compliment ebiggs."

Praise my friend. The photos are very nice.