Sigma 120-400 or Canon 100-400

[S_J_P]

Re: Sigma 120-400 or Canon 100-400

I'm sure a lot of you will already know of this site, but EFLens.com is a good link to the major review sites for all Canon glass (past and present).

Due to the varied cost of camera equipment between high-street retailers, the web, and grey importers, not to mention the fluctuations in exchange rates and the natural decline in price as a product matures, I find it frustrating that magazine reviews in particular put such a great score weighting biased towards cost. It would be so much easier if the score was based on absolute image quality, and then the prospective purchaser could decide whether a 10% improvement was worth £xxx or not themselves.

Talking of price fluctuations, who else has noticed that there's been a hefty price-hike on most of Canon's lenses recently?

[the black fox]

Re: Sigma 120-400 or Canon 100-400

what i was trying to put across is ,the simple fact that while you will undoubtedly get better results from a L lens the actual gap these days is far smaller than you would realise .so at the end of the day its down to personal finances .for instance i would love a 1dx and 600mm L lens plus a 1.4tc and a 2x tc ,but on my pension it ain't gonna happen ,but i,m always open to sponsorship offers

[S_J_P]

Re: Sigma 120-400 or Canon 100-400

I read a a comment elsewhere which summarises the benefits of L glass succinctly. The comment was relating to the EF 100-400 compared to the Sigma 150-500 but could be applied to virtually any comparison (except perhaps Sigma's latest and greatest Art series)

Whilst the Canon lens is certainly sharper wide-open, the difference disappears by f/8.

[briansquibb]

Re: Sigma 120-400 or Canon 100-400

The key factor is NOT the less - but the settings of the camera. The speed must be fast enough else it will be blurred. Focus on this before wandering of to purchasing a new lens. An also test it on a tripod is possible, you really cant judge a lens if the camera is shaking.

As for the other mentioned options, the 100-4000 is a big, heavy lens with the focal length amended by push pull . Personally I didn't get on with that as I found the push pulling moved the focus point.

Brian

[the black fox]

Re: Sigma 120-400 or Canon 100-400

yo brian where can i get that 4000 mm lens , and do they supply a caddy to carry it for you

[briansquibb]

Re: Sigma 120-400 or Canon 100-400

yo brian where can i get that 4000 mm lens , and do they supply a caddy to carry it for you

... lens come much longer than that - they use them to take star pictures

[Cyberman]

Re: Sigma 120-400 or Canon 100-400

Some great feedback and comments, I don't think its clear cut and I will have to think about it.
On the one hand the Canon lens has good image quality, a zoom function that divides people and is quite expensive.
On the other hand the Sigma has good quality maybe lowered at full zoom, but is much lower cost.

If only such decisions were easy.

[Paulstw]

Re: Sigma 120-400 or Canon 100-400

Buy a Sigma 70-200 2.8 coupled with their 2x tele converter. On MPB photographic both can be had for £570 used. That way you have two lenses. I've seen so many wildlife folk using this combo and seem to like to keep it hidden. The pics coming out of the combo are making me think twice too.

My mate uses a Sigma 150-500 on his 40D and he gets better results than me every time. Sometimes I wonder why I even bothered buying this gear everytime I see his pics lol

[the black fox]

Re: Sigma 120-400 or Canon 100-400

it does make you wonder sometimes paul ,that is a good combo to be fair ,they also do a 100-300 and a 300 prime that i think give good results with there own t.c's .
with the nikon set up i had i used a nikon 300mm f4 and a nikon 1.7tc ,and that gave 500mm hand-holdable with a 1.5 mtr close focus for insects and butterflies ,and to be honest i miss that extra reach ,had a sigma 150-500mm in the past and to although good it lacked quality ,even though i have seen good results from some of them .saying that i have seen poor results from some canon L lenses in the wrong hands

[Dave_S]

Re: Sigma 120-400 or Canon 100-400

Out of interest, I had a play with the Tamron SP 70-300 f/4-5.6 Di VC USD this afternoon.

Attached to the 5D Mklll, tripod mounted, remote release, and stabilisation off.

At 300mm f/8, its quite impressive, but the sharpness does tend to diminish a bit at f/5.6 (the lowest it will go at 300mm), albeit it is still surprisingly good for a lens that cost £300.

Dave

[Cyberman]

Re: Sigma 120-400 or Canon 100-400

I have hired the Canon 100-400 lens, and so far am very pleased with it.

[colin C]

Re: Sigma 120-400 or Canon 100-400

I have hired the Canon 100-400 lens, and so far am very pleased with it.

The only lens I have sold that I wish I had kept.