canon 1.4tc vs sigma 1.4tc

Gary

Gary

TPer Emeritus
Messages
8,561
Name
See above
Edit My Images
No
replaced my canon TC with a sigma version (after i dropped it).

I'm wondering if there could be a fault with the sigma?
the quality is awful compared to the canon.

Here's a shot from the same corner with the canon, and then with the sigma. This is by far the best quality image that came from the sigma, I had to bin most of them:

IMG_5186_xlarge.jpg


IMG_1202_xlarge.jpg
 
I am suprised you thought sigma would be as good as the canon? I have had the sigma 1.4 and even with a sigma lens it wasnt worth using..

I am sure someone will be along wiht examples of how fantastic theres is though :)
 
I have the sigma 2x and I think it's okay, but only when stopped down a bit and I'm not a pro so my standards are lower.
I presume that if you can afford it, the canon is superior.
my sigma 70-200 is visibly softer at f2.8 and therefore at 5.6 with the TC
therefore I use f8 ish with the TC where possible.
 
I have been through a lot of TCs and for me the Sigma was the worst of the lot - like you I found that the image quality wasn't up to the standard of the Canon and I also felt that the AF was slower. If you want a cheaper option than the Canon then the Kenko is worth a look as it give very similar IQ to the Canon. That said my Kenko caused some odd behaviour from the IS so I stopped using it, but many get on fine with it.
 
footman said:
I use the Kenko 1.4x with my 300 f2.8 and as far as I can determine there is no loss of IQ.
It's probably the best value item I've bought for photography and I wouldn't swap it for the Canon 1.4x.
Click to expand...


Same here I use the Kencko 300 pro 1.4x and even pixel peeping the loss of IQ is so small. There not too expensive either.
 
I have a Kenko 1.4X Pro 300 DG, Sigma 1.4X, Canon 2X III and Sigma 2X. I bought the Sigmas recently, after finding disappointing results with the Kenko and Canon on my Sigma 120-300/2.8 OS. The Sigma TCs play much better with this lens than the other TCs. The 1.4X is outstanding, the 2X less so, but still better than the Canon TC, which given the relative cost (£395 for the Canon vs £170 for the Sigma) proved to be a huge disappointment.

However, change to a Canon lens such as 135/2 or 70-200/2.8 and the Canon 2X TC comes into its own, with the Sigma being quite dreadful. Looking at the optics of the TCs just from an exterior viewpoint there are clear differences and I guess whatever the design/engineering approach there are reasons that matched brands perform better than unmatched brands.
 
Have you checked/recalibrated your AFMA value with the replacement TC?

Also, there appears to be a lot more heat haze on the Sigma shot and shot over three months apart (March 13th plays June 30th) that's no real surprise. You can't blame the glass if the atmosphere is FUBAR. I'm not saying that's the reason for sure, but something to consider.
 
Gary said:
hmm, maybe its faulty then

forgot to mention i'm using it with a sigma 120-300mm f2.8 lens
Click to expand...

With my 120-300 f2.8 I found that it was very sharp on it's own or with a 2x but needed a fair bit of MA when using a 1.4x. With the Canon it needed about +7 and with the Kenko +13, I had got rid of the Sigma before I got this lens so couldn't test it. Oddly it is the only lens that has needed a significant MA to get right when used with a TC. The same Canon and Kenko TCs work fine on other lenses without a need to MA.
 
Today I took my 7D and 120-300 with Sigma 1.4X out for a spin. Here are a few samples. All are hand held at 420mm and f/4, shot raw, and have some sharpening and possibly minor other tweaks applied in Lightroom. I'm sure I would have achieved sharper results by stopping down a little, even just by 1/3, but I wanted to check out performance wide open.

1. Maybe 200m away across a lake. Cropped.
20130710_093952_9530_LR.jpg


2. Uncropped
20130710_095043_9555_LR.jpg


3. 1/4 frame crop
20130710_095302_9557_LR.jpg


4. 1/4 frame crop
20130710_100351_9577_LR.jpg


5. Cropped. Needed smaller than f/4, but what the hell? ;)
20130710_111514_9592_LR.jpg


6. Uncropped
20130710_113652_9604_LR.jpg



I know none of these are hurtling towards the camera, so it's no test of AF tracking performance, but I just wanted to demonstrate IQ potential.
 
Last edited:
I use the aSigma 120-300 exclusively with the Sigma 1.4 TC and i dont take it off--very very sharp.I also have the Nikon 1.4tc and i would rate the Sigma at least as good if not better, contrast is better, colours are better and all rounds its a perfect match for the 120-300. I tried the Sigma 1.4 on the Nikon 600 AFS and it wasnt as good as the Nikon 1.4 tc so the Nikon tc stays with the Nikon lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top