Should I Have Switched? Goodbye Sigma 150-600C. Hello RF 100-500L!

I give my final parting review on the EF Sigma 150-600 C as I send it off into the used market and pick up a refurbished RF 100-500 L from Canon's Black Friday sale. Example images and experience from both as used on a Canon R5!!
Video:
R6; RF 16mm CLOG3
Audio:
Hollyland LARK M1
Edited in:
DaVinci Resolve 18.6
Thanks for watching!

[@KevinNordstrom]

I also switched from the sigma to the 100-500. The loss of 100mm on the long end I don't even miss. The AF and sharpness is leaps and bounds over the Sigma.

[@BeOkayPhotography]

I loved my sigma because it allowed me to capture things I never could before, but you are absolutely right, the 100-500 performs so much better, wonderful lens!

[@thephotochad]

You won't regret the decision, Brother.

[@robertlawrence7958]

I have to say it's refreshing to watch a video by someone as modest as yourself. Irrespective of the lenses you have been using you have produced some excellent images. Best wishes.

[@BeOkayPhotography]

🙌 I greatly appreciate such kind words!

[@adude394]

Funnily enough, I traded in my 150-600 C (EF) for the 150-600 S (same mount). Both lenses gave good account on my 7D Mk II and 1DX Mk III. However, I made the decision to move to mirrorless, and sold all of my DSLRs and EF/EF-S lenses. The first RF lens I picked up was the 100-500, and it was love at first sight, on both my R5 and R6 Mk II. I couldn't believe how light it was compared to the Sigma (the same goes for the 200-800), but the main thrust was just how good this lens was right out of the box. Just a really nice, solid lens.

[@anildangol]

Handheld video shooting due to lighter lens is something many users underappreciate. Also, it fits on my create bag perfectly.

[@BeOkayPhotography]

Great point, struggling to hold up a big heavy lens is going to eventually overtake even the best IS.

[@seanmarlow9514]

Using the RF 50 1.2 lens hood on the 100-500 is also good. The rig with a battery grip at one end and the smaller lens hood at the other means the whole caboodle fits in a backpack without reversing dismounting or any other faff.

[@jcloiseau]

Thank you very much for your video. I also got a great deal on the 100-500 and l didn't go the 150-600 because of the exact issues you mentioned. These weeks is the best time to buy the 100-500 as many people with fomo are trying to jump to the 200-800 since it is not fully reviewed yet. I'm sure Canon will drop the hammer on it in some way, and the 100-500 will continue to be great

[@BeOkayPhotography]

That 200-800 was tempting, but I saw that refurbed L go down to the exact same cost, and I couldn't resist! 600mm is great, ngl, but I think I made the right choice 🙂

[@jcloiseau]

@@BeOkayPhotography I saw in another review that when you actually compare the 200-600 sony and the 100-500 canon, to get the same field of view as 500 on the Canon you have to go 525 on the sony so in reality you're losing only 75mm reach. Though I don't know about the tamron / sigma ones

[@BeOkayPhotography]

​@@jcloiseauyou know I'd seen somewhere about the sigma actually being closer to 550mm, along those same lines. I can't find that info anymore, but it sounds like there is definitely something to variation in focal length and angle of view between manufacturers.

[@alansach8437]

The thing about reach is, when you need it, you need it.

[@BeOkayPhotography]

​@@alansach8437that is a tough fact to argue with lol, I'm with you. It is the only thing I'm not happy with. However, I will lose some shots from lack of reach and gain some others through the stabilization and AF improvements. Just a choice of compromise that'll play out in the field 👍

[@gustavew2249]

I used to shoot with a Sigma 150-600 Sports. Daily fitness is included, 2.8kg weight, quite frontheavy, so difficult to follow fast objects. I also switched to the Canon 100-500. Just 1.5kg. Lenses are placed much closer to the mount so the balance is really good. Following fast moving objects is possible with ease, even handheld. Plus: native RF-mount shooting on R5 is really fun now. Cons: f7.1 at 500mm vs f6.3 at 600mm on the Sigma. But i don't regret.

[@anthonyhershko]

Is it sharper than Sigma? I got the Sigma 60-600 mm. I'm happy with her, I just I'm curious about the 100-500 because it's the L series of Canon. Everyone says it's way more sharper. Thanks!

[@BeOkayPhotography]

Hi! It IS sharper than the 150-600 C. I'm big on 3rd party lenses, especially Sigma, but the performance is noticeably better. I was interested in that 60-600 back when I was in the market for the 150-600, but I've never shot with it.

[@anthonyhershko]

@BeOkayPhotography Thanks!

[@ElBoyoElectronico]

This lens is amazing!! You will definitely not regret it. Especially in combination with the R5, you can see the amazing sharpness which is also great for cropping.

[@BeOkayPhotography]

It renders detail beautifully for sure, I can absolutely tell the difference!

[@thibautmuraro6540]

Thank you for this video ! on a distant subject, Do we capture more detail with the Sigma (thanks to the better focal length) or with the Canon (thanks to the better quality)? Thanks!

[@KungPowEnterFist]

@3:15 That's as good as it gets with the RF 100-500. It is sharp at the long end, decent AF and IS. That is where the good news ends on that lens. You will not be getting any 3D pop and backgrounds often look pretty horrendous as is shown in the Pyrrhuloxia shot. 2/3 of a stop slower than the E 100-400 and Z 100-400 is a big disadvantage regardless of what people on YT will tell you, and it has little to do with a marginally higher ISO requirement. Canon really, desperately, urgently needs to release some mid-level super tele primes. Nikon's Z 400 f4.5, Z 600 PF and Z 800 PF have really changed the wildlife game. Canon (and Sony by an even greater amount) has fallen behind in the wildlife genre.

[@zih5903]

Hi I just came across your vlog and found it very interesting and informative. I also have an R5 but I'm still using an old EF 500mm f4. Soooo heavy. The one thing stopping me purchasing the RF100-500 is the F7.1 aperture. Have you had any issues with this and do I need change my mindset? Cheers.

[@BeOkayPhotography]

Hi, I would LOVE more light, but I just have no way of paying for more. The good thing is I can still get good shots on the R5 at 12800 or even 25600 if the conditions and my exposure are just right so it's definitely less of an issue with that body. I also find that using a lighter lens has made it much easier to go birding and shoot for longer, so weight absolutely matters if you're hiking around looking for subjects. More opportunities is the name of the game as far as I'm concerned! And finally, I was holding off on the 1.4x extender until later this year, but I went ahead and got one because I'm just a few miles from the path of eclipse totality here in a few days and wanted to get more magnification. I'm going to make a video on it soon! I'm excited to use the 700mm extended reach on birds too and am not too concerned with the f9/f10, if that helps guide you on the 7.1. When it gets too dark, I switch to shooting video at 1/120 SS anyway to adapt to poor lighting. Let me know what you end up doing!

[@zih5903]

Thank you so much for your response. Yes weight is an issue and more opportunities are preferable ie. I'm not getting shots with the lens sitting in the cupboard. I'm very tempted. Thank again. @@BeOkayPhotography

[@BeOkayPhotography]

@@zih5903 I bet the IQ on that 500 f4 is amazing though, despite the size

[@zih5903]

@BeOkayPhotography yeah it's OK 😀

[@marknongkhlaw1674]

Belated congratulations on the acquisition. As you're very familiar with the Sigma, could it be that it's best to use with DSLRs. Maybe it's not optimized for mirrorless hence the pulsing issues and slow focusing at times? Would love to hear your thoughts. Thanks

[@RogerZoul]

Excellent lens!

[@wellingtoncrescent2480]

When I bought my R7, I replaced my Sigma 150-600C with the RF 100-500. Not only is focus pulsing a non-issue, the new lens is lighter, the dual AF motors are responsive and accurate, the lens OIS works well with the R7 IBIS, and the image quality is spectacular. Between the trade-in value of the Sigma and a 20% off pre-Black Friday sale here in Canada, it didn't even break the bank. As for low-light performance, it's not an issue with mirrorless cameras, modern sensors, and denoising software. For what it's worth, image quality and AF performance are both excellent with the 1.4x TC. If you can manage the price, it is definitely worth upgrading, especially for birders. Enjoy 😊

[@BeOkayPhotography]

I think that'll be my next purchase, perhaps later this year. I bought a refurbished R6 as well when I picked up the 100-500, Canon's black Friday deals were truly fantastic, so I need to wait a bit. Definitely heard great things about the 1.4x with this lens. I would have gotten the R7 if I didn't need full frame for my various paid work. I miss that extra crop reach haha

[@wellingtoncrescent2480]

@@BeOkayPhotography I think that's a good choice. The TC definitely exceeded my expectations, at least with RF 100-500, and I prefer the combination to the 800 mm F11 prime or the new 200-800 mm F6.3-9. Since the minimum focus distance (0.9m) is preserved, you also get a nice macro option. The only negative is the fact that you can't collapse it below 300 mm because of the physical design, but I tend to use it at full zoom anyway. Good luck with it.

[@BeOkayPhotography]

​@@wellingtoncrescent2480 I'd heard about the odd design that removes wide end of the zoom, but like you said, 95% of the time I'm using the long end anyway so I don't think it'll keep me from eventually getting the TC. My Sigma may as well have been welded at 600mm except for a handful of exceptions 😂

[@wellingtoncrescent2480]

@@BeOkayPhotography You're right; I don't find it limiting when using the lens, but it also keeps the lens from collapsing fully when I put it in my camera bag. It's a minor inconvenience, but I had to replace my camera bag to allow for the extended length.

[@lifeandlandscapesinecuador]

I have been using the sigma for a couple of years now. Unfortunately I have an older Canon camera with outdated autofocus (6d to be specific) but I have still gotten some great shots even birds in flight. I would love to upgrade to an R5/100-500 combo some day. Thanks for vid

[@BeOkayPhotography]

Hi! I say, if you can figure out how to work it and get good shots, that's all that matters! To me, working with any gear comes down to familiarity and compromise 🙂

[@rolpal619]

Where did you sell your used gears to? What site? Thanks

[@BeOkayPhotography]

Hey! I sold this lens to MPB. I've sold to KEH as well, running an instant quote on each site is worth it to see who will pay out more for a given item 👍

[@jasontanner2163]

100-500 is excellent. Been using it since getting an R7 on release. PS. Unless Cooper's Hawk is VERY different where you are, I think you've mislabeled a Merlin. :)

[@BeOkayPhotography]

I bet that extra reach is awesome on the R7! I make my money shooting real estate so I avoided the crop body even though I'd love to shoot with an R7. You know, I had to do some comparison when you said that, but that "Cooper's" was just too big to be a merlin. BUT I haven't seen a merlin in person (for certain anyway lol) so I'm still doing some looking at my images. Thanks for the heads up!

[@OhhhhhhhBugger]

The 100-500 is the best IQ zoom lens I have ever used.

[@Millertime96]

I just bought my first real camera instead of using my cellphone for photography. I picked up an open box R7 for a good deal. the lens I have for it is a rf24-105 and am wanting to get a telephoto for more of my wildlife that I like to do. I thought maybe if I could find a used sigma 150-600 that it would be a better option for me instead of buying a new rf100-400 (the cheap non L one) as I am still learning. after seeing people having the AF issues with the sigma, would you recommend the cheap 100-400 instead?

[@ChuckleDrums]

Probably a bit late but would definitely recommend the RF 100-400 over the Sigma. The only plus of the Sigma is it will be slightly better in low light but the size, weight, sharpness and AF of the RF 100-400 is supposed to be really good, especially for the price.

[@anthonyhershko]

I got the R5 along with Sigma 60-600mm, Recently when I updated the Canon firmware to 2.0. I started to get blurry pictures, did you face that kind of a problem? Thanks!

[@BeOkayPhotography]

I'm sorry to hear the trouble. I have not upgraded my firmware to that version yet and don't recall having any issues making updates back when I was using my Sigma. I'd try to roll it back, hopefully it gets better!

[@anthonyhershko]

​@@BeOkayPhotography Thanks

[@canonlensesandcameras4425]

are you interested in being a guest on one of my livestreams?

[@BeOkayPhotography]

Sounds interesting, message my IG @be_okay_photography and we can chat about it, thanks!

[@christophercarlimages9003]

That Sigma was soft and slow

[@ItumelengS]

😢sucks people watch you so much yet dont subscribe

[@Mr09260]

F7.1 on a 500 Lol Thats darker than Midnight down a coal mine >> Nikon has a 180-600 f6.3 INTERNAL Zoom at 30% of the Price just for you

[@BeOkayPhotography]

Fair criticism of Canon's system. But 6.3 is hardly FAST by comparison. My R5 and R6 both have amazing low light capabilities so I'm not too concerned. Going back to a 95mm front element seems crazy now after going to such a smaller form factor. I can leave my tripod in the car now on most hikes which is a big deal for me. The Nikon is as heavy as the sigma I just got rid of, I'm glad it works for you, but for just a few hundred more, I got a step change in image quality and auto focus capabilities. The internal zoom is really cool.

[@gavthane]

You’re taking about a one third of a stop difference… plus the Canon is way lighter. On top of that, the Canon is slightly sharper throughout the whole zoom range than the Nikon.