Photoclubalpha

Just took delivery of my new 70400 and decided to compare it to my old Sigma 400 5.6 APO Macro. There have been a couple of reports of lemons, and with all this money at stake I figured I ought to check it out right away.

Better than the Sigma: focus speed, the fact that it's a zoom, build quality (I had another Sigma, same model, and my Maxxum 5D stripped its focus gearing - with SSM that should never happen).

Optical quality - see photos below. (The ones labeled 75-300mm are actually the Sigma - Sigma doesn't label lenses properly.) This is a test only of center sharpness. My subjects are birds, mostly, and edge sharpness is not really an issue for me. Both these lenses are FF so on my a55 I wouldn't expect edge sharpness to be a problem anyway. I used a tripod, SSS off. I focused manually on the white square (sticky paper) and got focus lock in the viewfinder. I examined the photos carefully to make sure that sharpest focus was not somewhere else - you see the best. The drive was set for a two-second delay to eliminate vibration from pressing the shutter button. In any case, both lenses received identical treatment. The only difference in the end was the odd exposure - at identical f stops the Sigma required more light and therefore a slower shutter speed.

So - comments?

I can see little differences here and there, but over all I'd say it's a wash.

Without wanting to comment on your pics, I have returned two 70-400 last year. The first one was a real lemon, often nothing was in focus. The second one was much better and sometimes delivered top pictures but sometimes not. With hindsight I don't know if it was a real lemon or not. But I did have doubts and no time to wait so I returned it.
I had before tested another 70-400 on my A700 and it was fine.

looks like motion blur...
I think Olaf was an early adopter on this lens, and he was quite happy with it. I was thinking about buying one (after all, it is not that big and heavy ) but I just don't need it at all, so I keep it on my wish list...

pakodominguez wrote:looks like motion blur..

at those shutter speeds and focal length, even on a tripod, you could be right....

OK, for you motion blur folks, I waited until the sun came up and did another run. I got sharper photos all right, but it is still too close to call on optical quality, but if I had to choose, it would be the Sigma.

Argonaut wrote:OK, for you motion blur folks, I waited until the sun came up and did another run. I got sharper photos all right, but it is still too close to call on optical quality, but if I had to choose, it would be the Sigma.

I guess you are talking about your friends on DPR -I saw the original post but I didn't bother to read the answers... I think it looks soft -both lenses. how it performs @300mm? how it performs @200mm?

pakodominguez wrote: I guess you are talking about your friends on DPR -I saw the original post but I didn't bother to read the answers... I think it looks soft -both lenses. how it performs @300mm? how it performs @200mm?

Hmm - didn't you mention motion blur on this blog? Whatever.

I agree, it looks too soft for me for the $$$ involved. However, I don't care nearly as much about 300mm and 200mm performance. 95% of my shots are/will be at full extension - 400mm - because birds are small. The lower end will be nice for larger wildlife, but 400mm is where the meat is. At this point, I should send the 70400 back, use my old lens, and use the money for an a77.

Argonaut wrote:

pakodominguez wrote: I guess you are talking about your friends on DPR -I saw the original post but I didn't bother to read the answers... I think it looks soft -both lenses. how it performs @300mm? how it performs @200mm?

Hmm - didn't you mention motion blur on this blog? Whatever.

you didn't repeat your test in less than 1 hour just because me, did you?

Argonaut wrote: I agree, it looks too soft for me for the $$$ involved. However, I don't care nearly as much about 300mm and 200mm performance. 95% of my shots are/will be at full extension - 400mm - because birds are small. The lower end will be nice for larger wildlife, but 400mm is where the meat is. At this point, I should send the 70400 back, use my old lens, and use the money for an a77.

I think you are right: send the lens back and try another one. I saw a couple of reviews about this lens saying that it's quality is outstanding. And I read on this very forum, Olaf talking wonderful things about it. You probably just got a bad copy, where did you bought it?

Regards

Pako

Pako - bought it from B&H. I guess I should call them and ask if they'll swap it.

Fist, thank you for sharing those picture test, it is always good to have real picture than just only feeling in a text.

Personally, I think it is never fair to test a Zoom lens at the end. Prime should be most of the time winner (depend of the price and quality of it).

Like at home I have the 50-500mm sigma, at the long end the lens is not the good one, but at 400mm it rocks.

I have saw in the past interesting testing from the 70-400mm compare to the 400mm F4.5 Minolta, where at the wide open aperture, the 70-400mm lens use in the test was really good (on Dyxum). I have hesitate a long time to know what I will do. I'm kind of pixel freak quality on lens (where it not good for the home budget ...), already a 200mm 2.8 user, I was looking to get real better reach than using the Minolta 2X. It end with the buying of the 400mm F4.5, but I'm still thinking that the 70-400mm should be the good option in budget wise.

The old sigma macro version is a one of its kind but like the 400mm 4.5 is not easy to find, so once you have one, I think you always have the better option. And the Prime shooting experience, is not suitable for everybody, it need good prediction of what you want to shoot and accept the limitation of not having the possibility to include more subject if it need in the action and risk of adding doggie-doo on the sensor when we are in the wild forest with the dust, sand and etc around (or need to buy another body ...).

Regards,

Frank

Argonaut wrote:Pako - bought it from B&H. I guess I should call them and ask if they'll swap it.

Yes -their policy is quite good, you have two weeks for return or exchange your products, even from the used department. If they don't want to exchange, just send it back as return and buy the lens from someone else. Keep in mind thatf you decide to buy it from SonyStyle, they won't exchange the lens if you daub about the quality, they will run the warranty and send it to their services, and, if you decide to return it, they will charge a fee.

I had one of the first 70-400’s available in the UK. When I took delivery of it I tested it thoroughly on both my A700 and A900 and at 300mm it performed as well as my 300 f4 G HS (now sold) - even open wide. At 400mm it is still exceedingly sharp. From the pictures you posted I’d swap your copy, it can and will do better.

Philip

Philip wrote:I had one of the first 70-400’s available in the UK. When I took delivery of it I tested it thoroughly on both my A700 and A900 and at 300mm it performed as well as my 300 f4 G HS (now sold) - even open wide. At 400mm it is still exceedingly sharp. From the pictures you posted I’d swap your copy, it can and will do better.

Philip

Seconded. I love mine.
Mike