Both of my copies had/have horrible focus speed on a 1D and 1DIIn.
The OS and image quality is pretty good across the board.
Canon EOS-1D Mark II N
Sigma 120-400mm
Exposure: 0.003 sec (1/400)
Aperture: f/7.1
Focal Length: 400 mm
ISO Speed: 800
Some PP. http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3018/2572051163_542ea811ce_o.jpg
I had a 150-500 for about a day.....it was very soft across the board and had issues with AF Servo on both my 30D and 40D bodies. The lens "hunted" alot even with high contrast subjects. Honestly, if I was going to do it again, I'd wait until more copies of them were released. Right now, it seems like very hit and miss.
For animals that aren't moving it's very good. Even wide open at the long end.
Neither of my copies hunt. But waiting for it to focus from close to across a field you can count, 1001, 1002......
If you can get hold of a Canon 400mm F5.6L, take some shots with it. Compare them with the 120-400 and 150-500. I believe there will be a world of difference.
Venus is spot on, and for that matter so is Walshy...of the zooms I've used the Sigma 100-300 f4 was by far the bets performer, and if you shoot at 400 the 400 5.6 Canon knocks spots off the 100-400 IS. At one stage I had the Sigma and the 400 5.6, now I have the 100-400 but I'd go back to lugging around the lenses any day....
Andrew J wrote:
For animals that aren't moving it's very good. Even wide open at the long end.
Neither of my copies hunt. But waiting for it to focus from close to across a field you can count, 1001, 1002......
Any lens that does not have a focus-limiter switch is a poor choice for wildlife.
