p.2 #3 · Opinions please on Canon 100 400 or Sigma 150 500
I sold and repurchased the 100-400 after regretting selling it. This is my go to lens for car and motorcycle races. I sold my 400 f5.6 which I strictly used for birding. Best BIF lens.
p.2 #4 · Opinions please on Canon 100 400 or Sigma 150 500
Get the 100-400. Its an extremely versatile lens with excellent image quality and decent IS. In this sort of price range your Canon options are 70-300L, 100-400L, 300 F4L or 400 5.6L. The zooms are far more flexible when it comes to all around photography. I spent a long time researching all the options and in the end opted for the 100-400, no regrets. The flexibility, IS and having the full 100-400 range is hard to beat. The primes have a slight edge when it comes to IQ/AF but its closer than you might think. When i first got the 100-400 i thought it was quite big but it has fast become the lens i can walk around all day with. Depending on your shooting conditions the 100-400 gives you F5.6 at 400 which is slow but ok given you also have high ISO and the IS to help you. With the 150-500 your at F6.3 so your going to need even more light and i am not sure if the image stabilisation on the 150-500 is as effective as the IS on the 100-400.
p.2 #5 · Opinions please on Canon 100 400 or Sigma 150 500
Jase1125 wrote:
Teamspeed has owned and used both. Folks who have owned both usually prefer the canon. I have the 100-400L and so far I am pleased with it.
I have the 50-500 OS, not the 150-500. I like the 50-500 a bit more over the 150-500.
I had 3 100-400Ls, one was extremely sharp, the other 2 were lame ducks. I wouldn't mind a sharp 100-400L again, I miss the push/pull and the lighter weight.
Here are some shots in the last week from the 50-500 OS. The OS on this lens kills the 100-400L, which is understandable considering how old the IS system is on the 100-400L. The Sigma also has a macro mode right around the 200mm mark. You can get within a foot or so of subject material at this focal length. Finally the bokeh on the Sigma is a bit better than the 100-400L, IMO.
These were on the 7D too, which from many accounts, isn't that sharp.
p.2 #6 · Opinions please on Canon 100 400 or Sigma 150 500
Teamspeed, those are nice shots. However, they look like proximity shots.......even Imagemaster can get sharp shots on targets 6-8 ft distant with a variety of lenses.
Do you have any a bit longer range pictures with the Sigma, such as 50-60 ft focusing distance?
I will add that you have to stop the Sigma down to f7 or f8 to really get crisp shots on any of the 18mpx APS-C bodies. The lens is great wide-open on a full-frame, I had no complaints at all on the 5D or 5D2. You also need light, the lens gets a bit touchy at dusk/dawn.
p.2 #11 · Opinions please on Canon 100 400 or Sigma 150 500
One more link, I have shot 3 years of band competition with this lens (or at least 2 of the past 3 years). This album is a good mix taken with this lens from both the 7D and 5D2.
The original sized images are accessible there as well. It is not a razor sharp lens by any means, but given its range and OS, it has been quite versatile.
p.2 #14 · Opinions please on Canon 100 400 or Sigma 150 500
Objectively the 100-400 is a better lens, although the OS in the sigma is better. The Sigma performs OK and is where I'd expect it with the price difference, the 100-400 wasn't that much better that I wanted to pay the extra (second hand here at the time it was nearly twice the price). I'm not a fan of push\pull zoom either. I mainly used the Sigma for airshows and i'm not convinced a 100-400 would have been any better for my use. For wildlife though the IQ advantage of the 100-400 may be worth looking at. The Sigma IQ gets better stopped down, if you're able to get to f8...
I'm currently just using a 70-200mkII with a 2 TC if I need the reach. By the time I have the funds hopefully a replacement 100-400 will be on the cards, or I might try out the 400 f5.6.
p.2 #16 · Opinions please on Canon 100 400 or Sigma 150 500
I like my 100-400 a lot. The lens has its moments when it yields a fairly high grade IQ, but it does need good light.(The example shot with 1DMkIIN + 100-400 @ 400mm and f/5.6.)
p.2 #18 · Opinions please on Canon 100 400 or Sigma 150 500
I have both as I bought the 150-500 when I had a 10D and its limitations weren't so apparent. I basically only lend it to one of my sons-in-law when they join me at an airshow these days - the 100-400 blows it out of the water.
Niall
p.2 #19 · Opinions please on Canon 100 400 or Sigma 150 500
never used either (well held a 100-400 and took a few snaps with one but not really used it) but i've know i've heard some complaints, lots, about the sigma 150-500 so i might tend to look canon 100-400, the complaints i've heard baout it didn't sound nearly as bad, anyway take that for what little it is worth
p.2 #20 · Opinions please on Canon 100 400 or Sigma 150 500
Pixel Perfect wrote:
100-400L any day.
Sigma for a start is actually much less than 500mm, closer to 460mm Canon is around 385mm. IQ of the 150-500 drops off after 300mm, Canon is good through the range and usually sharp wide open.
From what I've read the Sigma 50-500 is a better lens than the 150-500. Also there were a lot of issues with the 150-500 at least when released and many were returned. Not sure about it now, but I lost interest after seeing the reviews. 100-400L is simply a fantastic lens. The only thing the Sigma would have the advantage in is IS as Canon's is first gen 2 stop and Sigma is 3-4 stop....Show more →
I would agree, after trying several Canon primes (300mm, 400mm, 500mm) I am stopped on 100-400L and no regrets. Lens is perfect in sharpness, pretty light and compact at 70mm. IS not as superb as on new 70-200mm mk II but OK. Also so far very cheap in compare to any supertelephoto Canon is making.
Excellent for wild and birding including larger birds below
