advice: sigma 150-500 OR canon 100-400L OR canon 70-200 2.8L with 2x TC?

[devilgas]

[Stephen]

Re: advice: sigma 150-500 OR canon 100-400L OR canon 70-200 2.8L with 2x TC?

Dave, as you may already know I have the Canon 100-400. I went for the Canon cos basically I'm a bit of a lens snob and decided some years ago that there was to be no compromise with my lenses. So I only have L series glass with 77mm filter threads. I also use the 1.4TC, though only on my 70-200 and I don't feel it compromises the lens in any way. Not sure about a 2x TC though.

The 100-400 is a bit of a beast if I'm honest, both in its length @ 400mm and its weight. However IMHO the optics are superb and the IS is brilliant. TBH when you look through the viewfinder at 400mm and touch the shutter release the effect is uncanny The only thing I'm unsure about is the push/pull zoom action. It has a locking ring which stops it flopping when its slung over the shoulder. The Sigma looks as though it has a twist action on the zoom. With an 850mm equiv focal length on the Sigma it may have the edge for you.

The most recent example I have of the Canon was shown recently on the forum HERE

[Bear]

Re: advice: sigma 150-500 OR canon 100-400L OR canon 70-200 2.8L with 2x TC?

I am not a Canon user and oddly enough, never have been, but in this situation I would, if I had the cash, go for the Canon option. Another lens to consider though, is the Sigma 120-400. I have seen reviews that compare this one very favourably to the Canon for much less money. I will try to find the review for you.

[Bear]

Re: advice: sigma 150-500 OR canon 100-400L OR canon 70-200 2.8L with 2x TC?

Here it is:

http://darwinwiggett.wordpress.com/2010/02/23/lens-review-the-sigma-120-400-4-5-5-6-apo-hsm-telephoto-zoom/

[devilgas]

[devilgas]

Re: advice: sigma 150-500 OR canon 100-400L OR canon 70-200 2.8L with 2x TC?

have found a VERY useful resource..... http://www.the-digital-picture.com/r...ple-Crops.aspx

[Patrick]

Re: advice: sigma 150-500 OR canon 100-400L OR canon 70-200 2.8L with 2x TC?

have found a VERY useful resource..... http://www.the-digital-picture.com/r...ple-Crops.aspx

I have the Sigma 150-500.
Capable of extremely good results see picture with this post, a Lion portrait.
Hand held from a car with image stabilizer on.

It can be disappointing at infinity using the 500mm end. I had a Canon L lens f4 300mm that was the same at infinity, so it may be something to do with telephoto lenses.
A 1x4 converter is fine no problems you just loose a stop.
To use a 2X converter, don't go there, I have, its possible to get sharper results by cropping and interpolating your image file.

Patrick

[devilgas]

Re: advice: sigma 150-500 OR canon 100-400L OR canon 70-200 2.8L with 2x TC?

thanks patrick. i now have a big ask..... is there any chance you could send me a random full size photo (without any additional PP) shot with the sig at 500mm, of preferably a subject about 30-40m away? (i'll be mainly using the lens for cricket photos for publication ). i can then see how sharp (or soft) the images are and what PP can be done to get them to what i'd need. thanks in advance!!
also, are you using on a canon or a nikon? iirc you're a canon user. i know the sig on the nik is a lot sharper than on the canon.

thanks for the suggestion of the 80-400 bear. i hadn't considered that, and looking in the comparison website, it performs better @400mm, f8 than the 150-500 @400mm, f8

[Pops]

Re: advice: sigma 150-500 OR canon 100-400L OR canon 70-200 2.8L with 2x TC?

I can echo Stephen's comments re the canon 400L. I also have this lens and get some excellent results with my bird photography.
Its ceratinly not a walk around lens but suits me just fine.

[devilgas]

Re: advice: sigma 150-500 OR canon 100-400L OR canon 70-200 2.8L with 2x TC?

thanks all. have a siggy 80-400 on order as in the cold light of day, i couldn't justify the cost of the canon for what will most likely be a non-workhorse lens. if i find i'm using the 400 more than the 200 2.8L then i'll look to the canon again in future.

[Patrick]

Re: advice: sigma 150-500 OR canon 100-400L OR canon 70-200 2.8L with 2x TC?

thanks all. have a siggy 80-400 on order as in the cold light of day, i couldn't justify the cost of the canon for what will most likely be a non-workhorse lens. if i find i'm using the 400 more than the 200 2.8L then i'll look to the canon again in future.

I had a 80-400 a few years ago and in some ways wish I still had it.
the 150-500 is good but I sometimes think the 80-400 was better, and with hindsight the 100mm isn't a tremendous gain.
There is probably no denying the Canon to be on the test bed a better lens, however in practice I doubt the difference is that noticeable. Much will depend on how the images are presented, on screen, projected or print. The size the image when viewed will also play its part.

I have some really tack sharp shots from my 150-500 but I have also got some rather soft results. So technique also plays its part as well.
I use a Canon 40D and have found when using the lens in servo mode I get the best results. It took some time for this to dawn on me as I didn't try servo for some time.
The Boca on the 150-500 is also a little strange, it can resemble camera movement rather than softening of focus. So the sharp part of the image is just that, sharp, but what seems like camera shake appears in the background or near out of focus areas.

Enjoy the new lens

Patrick

[devilgas]

Re: advice: sigma 150-500 OR canon 100-400L OR canon 70-200 2.8L with 2x TC?

thanks patrick. this entire thing came about after i tried the 500mm mirror lens i have knocking around and discovered it had the exact reach i was after. with it being a fixed F8 MF lens, focussing is critical and also the images are softer than i could put up with....hence the search for something better
the OS on the 80-400 is also a big draw as i CBA fiddling with a monopod at the best of times.

images will be either prints or for use in the papers. the latter, i can get away with lower quality, the former, not so.

[Patrick]

Re: advice: sigma 150-500 OR canon 100-400L OR canon 70-200 2.8L with 2x TC?

thanks patrick. this entire thing came about after i tried the 500mm mirror lens i have knocking around and discovered it had the exact reach i was after. with it being a fixed F8 MF lens, focussing is critical and also the images are softer than i could put up with....hence the search for something better
the OS on the 80-400 is also a big draw as i CBA fiddling with a monopod at the best of times.

images will be either prints or for use in the papers. the latter, i can get away with lower quality, the former, not so.

The stabilizer is very helpful, particularly used in conjunction with a mono pod.
The 150-500 has two types one for general use and one for horizontal use (Panning) both are 4 stops, its on the noisy side (acoustically not in the image).
The 80-400 I had was just the one type and two stop which I believe is the same on the Canon, unless they have either or both been upgraded more recently.

Patrick

[devilgas]

Re: advice: sigma 150-500 OR canon 100-400L OR canon 70-200 2.8L with 2x TC?

it should be the newer 2 type IS. guess i'll find out when it arrives....

to be honest, the use it's intended for dictates higher shutter speeds anyway (one of the reasons i went for the non-IS 70-200 2.8L), but i'm guessing it'll open up other possibilities.

[Patrick]

Re: advice: sigma 150-500 OR canon 100-400L OR canon 70-200 2.8L with 2x TC?

it should be the newer 2 type IS. guess i'll find out when it arrives....

to be honest, the use it's intended for dictates higher shutter speeds anyway (one of the reasons i went for the non-IS 70-200 2.8L), but i'm guessing it'll open up other possibilities.

Here is another shot taken with the 150-500.

I checked the exif data Its f8 1/1250 sec shutter 640ISO focus distance 4.5m at the 500mm end

The Lion I posted earlier in this thread was f9 1/320 640ISO focus distance 7.9m also at the 500mm end

Patrick