Sigma 150-600c on a trip to the zoo

[Tronhard]

The zoo is a great place to test and practice with gear for going out into the wild.   On this occasion, as part of my general downsizing of gear, I was shooting with the Sigma 150-600c, using the Canon R6 via the Canon EF-RF adapter - specifically to demonstrate its performance for a prospective buyer.

The issue of 3rd party lenses on Canon R-series bodies has been somewhat contentious, with some saying they don't work, and Canon should adapt their camera to make them work (which is silly - the onus is the other way round), and others demanding Canon allow 3rd parties build true RF lenses - which I think will happen eventually.  The result was that when I was selling my Sigma, I wanted to assure myself and others that this lens has no issues - especially since a couple of videos emerged showing issues with that lens on the R7, something I think is specific to that combination.

So, to make sure I went hunting, and here are the results.  I might add that apart from a couple of outrageously out of focus shots (which I admit were my fault) I had 100% keeper rate.  All shots hand-held, available light.

R6 RF 100-500@ 252mm, f/5.6, 1/250sec, ISO-100

435mm, f/7.1, 1/500sec, ISO-640

205mm, f/5.6, 1/320sec, ISO-250

R6, Sigma 150-600c@ 600mm, f/7.1, 1/640 sec, ISO-1250

403mm, f/6.3, 1/400sec, ISO-250

My conclusion is that for the R6 and R5, which I have shot extensively with using this lens, there is no issue that I have encountered.  I would keep this lens quite happily, but I already have the Sigma 60-600s lens, and it makes no sense to have the duplicate range.

 

[shadowsports]

Our man of the hour.  Have missed you Sir!

The first flamingo reflection is stunning.  Its truly a remarkable lens.  

[Tronhard]

Hi Rick:
Thanks so much for your kind comments.  Yep, two heart attacks and a couple of strokes have slowed me down somewhat, but I am on the mend and determined to hang in there for another couple of decades!

One thing I learned from the recent death of a good friend was that when one leaves a lot of camera gear behind for relatives to dispose of, it is a big burden for them.  I took on that responsibility on behalf of his widow, and it was a chore as I had quite a bit of gear to deal with.  I decided to put it all to a local store to sell on consignment, but they wanted receipts for everything, which was a challenge as he had not kept them.  I ended up contacting all the stores in the area and getting them to search their records, and finally got them all.
So, I have decided to massively downsize my own rather large collection of gear and am doing the same thing.  Luckily, I kept both the boxes and the receipts, so that has been much easier.  The hard part was deciding what to get rid of an what to keep, but I'm pretty well there now.

A couple of lenses (150-600c included) I have decided to sell on my own to avoid the 20% consignment fee.  Thus, the exercise to assure buyers that the lens is a good match for R-series bodies, which I hope I have done.

I'm taking it slow in getting back to replying to all the posts that come up here, but I enjoy the community and I like helping folks, so I hope to continue for a long time.

[Tintype_18]

I trust the health issues are in the past. A friend has a saying, "Life is like water skiing. You slow down, you go down."

My favorite photo is the reflection of the flamingo. I have some good photos of zoos, using my wife's camera, SX 530HS.

[Far-Out-Dude]

I very seriously debated between the Sigma you mention and the Canon 100-400 and after spending hours online looking at pictures and having friends bring pictures up online and not tell me from which of the two lenses the pictures were from I kept choosing the 100-400 so I order that later this month.

I do disagree that Canon should not allow others to make full RF lenses, I do not like them saying no and find it rather underhanded myself. I do not like monopolies.

[Tronhard]

There are some points you need to consider here:
1. Canon are not alone in this, Nikon have just said that they are going to be very choosy about what lenses will be accepted from 3rd parties.   Canon, having the most market share, tend to get most of the flak - just like Microsoft do in the computer software market.   In NZ we call that 'Tall Poppy Syndrome'.   Fuji have only recently, after many years, allowed Tamron to make a few lenses for their XF camera mount.

2 Both Canon and Nikon have come out with completely new systems, including (but not limited to) sensors, IBIS, lens mounts and the firmware that makes all of those things work together.   They have also come out with a range of lenses specifically designed for those systems - at huge cost: I would expect in the billions.   They need to get those investments returned, so they are limiting access to their mount for the foreseeable future in order to recoup those investments, establish a brand and ensure quality control.  When these new systems come out, there will be a fairly intense period of adding firmware updates, both to fix bugs and add new features - in other words the platform is dynamically changing.  Having 3rd parties add lenses complicates the picture because those lenses may not play nicely with these changes, and that will create issues with the market. I might add that even now people are complaining that Canon should adapt their cameras to support new or legacy 3rd party lenses - that is utterly ridiculous and shows a complete ignorance of how manufacturing works.

People keep bringing up Sony, saying that they allow many third-party lenses, but what is forgotten is that Sony began using their MILC systems about 10 years ago, so they are way ahead on the technology maturity curve than either Nikon or Canon. I actually went back and logged the release of 3rd Party lenses for Sony and initially they were a trickle, with significant number appearing only after 5-6 years after the mount release.  Thus, Sony have had a long time to recoup their investment and establish the tech.  For Nikon and Canon that would be about next year although they both had to deal with COVID disruptions to design, manufacture and distribution.    So that Sony argument is not relevant or valid.   

No camera maker operates a monopoly: the market is filled with great brands and is extremely competitive.  One can move to Sony, Fuji, Nikon etc. if one does not agree with Canon.  I might also add that it is illegal for 3rd parties to reverse engineer technology that is protected by trademark or copyright - this is not an open-source environment.  Would one expect Tesla to hand over the IP for their vehicles, or for Apple to do the same for their technology, or Adobe to give access to their software code?  I suspect not...

Based on the statement reported recently that Canon and Nikon have suggested they will accept 3rd party lenses on a case-by-case basis, ( see: Canon will approve third-party RF lenses on "a case-by-case basis" | Digital Camera World).  This is not unlike the period of change in the 90's when Canon moved from the FD mount to the EF mount.  They had a period of Canon-only lenses but the market for 3rd parties opened up eventually - this time the tech is more complicated and more expensive.  People are judging very mature markets with brand new developments and that is neither valid, nor fair - especially to single out Canon when it's true of other brands.

I expect a period of 3rd-party lenses in-fill for those focal lengths that Canon does not choose to compete in, and eventually (like Sony) they will open the market up completely.  I hope to see some lenses like Sigma's awesome 60-600s or the 150-600c lenses that Canon are unlikely to make.   It would also be great to see Tamron's excellent 18-300mm F3.5-6.3 Di III-A VC VXD - available to Sony and Fuji APS-C mounts, made available for Canon RF bodies with the same sensor format.

In the meantime, one can use many legacy EF lenses via the mount adapter and still get good results.  I hope my images demonstrate that.  I still shoot legacy lenses - for example, I prefer the EF 70-200 f/4 MkII L over the new RF version because it does not extend while zooming, and pump air into the camera body with an exposed sensor.