Lens support - Sigma 100-400mm DG DN (Sony e-mount)


is a profile for the Sigma 100-400mm DG DN ( Sony e-mount ) going to be available soon ?


1 Like

Is this lens profile in the roadmap ?
I have already sent a request but there is no feedback.

Without a profile, PL4 is pretty useless to me, I still have to use my old CaptureOne that gives me better results because it uses the RAW embedded profile (which is a lot better than no profile at all)
Thank you.

i’m very much interested in the same lens but with l-mount (lumix). i’m plannig to buy this lens and since it’s been out for quite a while now i was taking existing support for it by photolab for granted. i see now i was wrong. will this lens ever be supported? if not i have 2 options - not buy the lens or stop using photolab.

Hello DxO team,
please can you tell if this lens profile is in the roadmap ?



we will add this lens to our roadmap, hopefully for a support this year.


Thank you.

Will the support be added in Photolab 4, or only Photolab 5 ?
(Hope I can still get the new lens support in Photolab 4 )

Hello @Fwed ,

when we will support Sigma 100-400mm (Sony FE) it will be supported also in PL4 if your camera is compatible.


+1 for this lens, but on Panasonic L mount (particularly S1R)


Are there any chances to get this in January 2022?

I wouldn’t call PL 4 or 5 useless just because a tele-zoom-lens is not supported, but I fully agree on “better an embedded profile than none”. The 100-400 has far less distortions than Sigma’s “newest” i-lens series which are, bluntly said, horrible in terms of distortion.

I also see it as the lens manufacturer’s responsibility to deliver this profile for free to RAW-converter companies as otherwise the lens is useless for some subjects like architecture or product photography. Sigma does deliver - but the results of the 24/2 C with lens profile read by C1 are worse than manually altered distortion with PL5. And a lot of Sigma’s latest DG DN lenses suffer from this “distortion is less important to correct than sharpness” dogma.

Not to let manufacturers off the hook, but I believe DxO prefers to do its own detailed lens analyses, which requires having an actual lens (and body) available for them to examine/test/evaluate. I don’t know how this actually works, but I expect DxO (and lens customers) would benefit if manufacturers provided the lens/body for testing, if only as a loan.

Last October you were raising hope for 2021, it’s now end of February 2022 and the lens profile is still missing, at least for L mount (not sure about E mount). Is this still happening or do we need to start thinking about alternative software?

I’ve couple of Sigma glass for L-mount. For the 100-400 i could not see a very urgent need to improve it’s performance (contrary to the i-Series or other wider angles). I also don’t see much change when I open pictures from this lens in Capture One. Which also doesn’t support it else than with applying “manufacturer’s profile”. So I’m curious @juerg what is your main concern?

Only because there is a need for the i-Series that doesn’t mean that other lenses should be ignored. My expectation from DxO is that they support all recent lenses, that’s what they receive money for. If they plan to leave the 100-400mm out I think they should clearly communicate that so customers know what to expect - either before they buy the lens or before they buy PhotoLab.

Quite simple – check DxO Supported Cameras & Lenses before buy – and forget it, if not supported!

@Wolfgang you’re seriously recommending buying equipments like cameras or lenses after a list of one single RAW converter?

I never said something about ignoring lenses. And you or I or anybody else never got a promise from DxO that no matter what, your lens will always be supported.

Don’t think it’s sensible to invest in lenses that are not supported same as to buy software, that doesn’t recognize the present equipment.

Aha. I wonder how Zeiss, Leitz, Canon and Nikon amongst many others could ever developed lenses at a time there was never any software around? Maybe @Joanna knows more about this subject than I do. And I also wonder how you could invest in software not able to read lens manufacturer’s profiles? :thinking: :wink:

You like arguing?! – Before I got PL, I knew my lenses are suported (except the TC) and even lenses I had used in the past. Seems too difficult for some.

I’m not aware of any single problem solved by the sentence “you should have checked before”. Ever. It’s also not the answer to the increasing amount of lenses flooding the market since it became rather easy to adapt everything on various mirrorless cameras as it’s much easier now to design lenses with shorter flange distances. A lot of them are manual focus because that makes development again easier and cheaper.

@Juerg was complaining about a missing lens module although it was … well, I don’t know if “promised”, “announced”, “talked about” is the right term, but apparently DxO caused some disappointment. I understand it’s time consuming to first measure the flaws of lenses (which should be done on more than one copy to to minimize sample variation) and the implement the counter measures. My suggestion is: DXO-Forum implements what C1 and LR already have, a module to read and use the lens’ firmware. Then there’s at least some helpful improvement contrary to be left alone for months or years or read gleeful comments like yours.

You can think that if you have enough (lens) choices. On some systems there’s not a dozen 100-400 available to choose from. But of course, there are more RAW converters available than only DxO’s PL.