Purists, please excuse the abbreviated names − I wanted to make the headline a bit more friendly. The two lenses in question are surely the Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports and the newly announced Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM, shown to scale below. Click on the “Compare Images” button.
In spite of the different focal length range and aperture, I expect that some EOS shooters will debate whether getting one or the other. It may sound obvious that users looking for reach should choose the Sigma lens, but I sure bet those extra 200mm will not always be enough of a reason. Like any new pro Canon lens, this 100-400mm is a very appealing package, and it comes with a price tag that is not much higher than the Sigma’s.
As an initial approach, here is a table comparing the two lenses. Beyond focal length and aperture, you may find some points that make one more suitable than the other for you.
|Angle of View||24º-6.1º||16.4º-4.1º|
|AF with 1.4× Teleconverter||Up to 560mm (full range)||Up to ~600mm|
|Manual Focus Override||On AF switch||On dedicated MO (manual override) switch|
|Stabilization Modes||Standard, panning, during exposure only||Standard, panning (further customizable through optional USB Dock)|
|AF and Stabilization Fine-tuning||No||Yes (with optional USB Dock)|
|Protection Coating||Yes (both front and rear lenses)||Yes (both front and rear lenses)|
|Optical Construction||21 elements in 16 groups||24 elements in 16 groups|
|Special Glass||1 fluorite and 1 SUD elements||2 FLD and 3 SLD elements|
|Zoom Lock Switch||No||Yes|
|Zoom Ring Resistance Adjustment||Yes||No|
|Filter Thread||77 mm||105 mm|
|Minimum Focusing Distance||98 cm / 38.6 in||260 cm / 102.4 in|
|Maximum Magnification ratio||1:3.2 (0.31×)||1:5 (0.20×)|
|Diaphragm Blades||9 (rounded)||9 (rounded)|
|Lens Hood||Filter-friendly (side window for filter adjustment)||Regular|
|Size||94 x 193 mm / 3.7 x 7.6 in||121 x 290.2 mm / 4.8 x 11.4 in|
|Weight||1,570 g / 55.38 oz||2,860 g / 100.9 oz|
|US Warranty||1 year||4 years|