Posted by Daniel Barton on August 18, 2009 at 6:29 PM
Hello All,
I apologize in advance for starting another 'which lens' topic, but I am very curious whether anyone uses or has used two EOS-mount lenses that I've been looking at. Currently, I use a 40D and XTi with my trusty Canon 300 mm f/4L and often a 1.4x TC. I have considered going to the Canon 300 mm f/2.8L, but I don't want to take the hit on my credit card - I'm a grad student - so I've been looking at other glass. I generally use my camera while working (i.e. walking around finding and monitoring bird nests), so a fixed 500 mm is out of the question simply for its size - as well as cash. So, beyond the obviously nice and sharp Canon 400 f/5.6L and the Canon 100-400 zoom, there seem to be two interesting options:
1) Sigma 50-500 mm 'Bigma'
and
2) Sigma 150-500 mm OS lens, a newer offering
I'm curious if anybody has used these lenses - I'm curious about recently purchased copies in particular (because Sigma is so weird on their QC) - for bird photography, and in particular, if you've used both, I'd love to hear about your experience. If you have a spare 300 mm f/2.8 or 500 mm f/4 laying around, you could always just give it to me and then this thread would be unnecessary.
Best,
Dan
Posted by Mia McPherson on August 18, 2009 at 7:32 PM
Daniel,
I owned the 50-500mm "Bigma", but that was several years ago. I wasn't happy with it for several reasons, it did not have VR/IS was one, another is that the colors it produced just did not seem accurate to me. I sold it within just a few months of making the purchase.
I know that isn't much help for you since it was an older version, but that is my two cents.
I bought the Sigma 150-500, used it for about 2 months, then bought a copy of the canon 400mm f/5.6. I The 400mm is sharp wide open while with the sigma I had to stop down to at least f/8. The image quality of the sigma is ok if you are showing full frame most of the time, but when you start cropping any softness becomes more apparent. I'm not convinced the sigma is actually 500mm when it is fully extended either. IMO spend the extra few hundred bucks for the 400mm. I can't afford the canon 500mm right now either so I use the 400 as my everyday lens. It is on my camera bout 99% of the time. I have no regrets about upgrading from the sigma.
I Know the money is up ther but I can't say enough about that awesome Canon 300 2.8 L lens.You can rent one for a week for 200 or so plus a 2x converter as well. Thats how I ended up with it. You can then buy from the same company a used rented 13 weeks lens for less money. The link is www.lensrentals.com His name is Roger and you can use my name
The speed and clarity of this lens are mindblowing
Posted by Steve Foss on September 10, 2009 at 9:17 AM
Daniel, sorry I've come late to this thread, but I've used the Canon supertele primes and the 100-400 widely for avian photography.
I'd not consider either Siggie zoom for the reasons already stated. Sharp enough if no cropping takes place, but too soft for significant cropping. The 100-400 is sharper than either of the Siggies, and of course the 300, 400 and 500 primes are the sharpest of all mentioned here. I've taken 70 percent away from 8 Mp images shot with the 400 f5.6 and still gotten excellent 11x14 prints. Can't say the same any of the zooms in this lineup.
With the 300 f2.8/TC, you're at f4 wide open with great IQ from the combo, and you get a bit of flexibility in situations where you don't need the 400mm reach and can remove the TC). Also, on the xxD series cameras, when the center focus point is selected and the lens opens to f2.8 or wider max aperture, the body/lens combo offers increased AF precision. This is an excellent combo for sure.
Budget is a consideration for you, and the f4 and f2.8 versions of the 300 are both tack sharp, so all you'd be gaining with the upgrade is a single stop of speed. Unless you are a sports shooter, that stop isn't as important as technique and woodscraft. Plus, it's pretty heavy and big for you to cart around the woods checking nests.
When recommending either the 100-400 or the 400 f5.6 to clients, my primary question always is: Which is more important to you, extreme sharpness or zoom flexibility? Some additional points. While many avian photographers pursue tight portraits, the viewing public generally responds better to images of birds in beautiful environments, so the ability to zoom out is obvious. While both lenses weigh essentially the same, the 400 makes a significantly more compact package than the zoom (the 100-400 is an unwieldy push-pull design). And lastly, unless you're shooting in bright light or panning BIF shots, the 400 prime responds best off a monopod/tripod, since you don't have the benefit of either a fast aperture or IS. I've also gotten beautiful IQ out of the 400 prime with the 1.4 TC. AF will not be available at f8 on your body, but I've used this combo off a tripod shooting fixed locations like eagle and osprey nests, when manually focusing on a specific point and stopping down to, say, f11 in good light can get you really nice images. You can do the same thing on the 100-400, but IQ isn't as good with the TC because of the slight softness inherent in zooms vs primes.
Also, there's no need to buy new necessarily. I do most of my buying and selling on the "sell" classifieds board at Photography on the Net. It's a Canon-specific site, and a LOT of gear gets posted for sale there daily. I've bought and sold many items there over the last few years and have never had a bad experience either as buyer or seller. You should be able to find a lightly used 400 f5.6L for around $900-$950, the 100-400 for about $1,100 or so and the 300 f2.8 for about $3,500. Also, are you planning to sell your 300 f4 to fund the purchase of a different lens? If so, it'll bring about as much used as you'd pay for a used 400 f5.6, or you'd only end up shelling out a bit more if you opt for the 100-400. There are plenty of trades that go on in that board, too.
Whichever you choose, good luck out there and have a fun time!
Discussion
6 repliesI apologize in advance for starting another 'which lens' topic, but I am very curious whether anyone uses or has used two EOS-mount lenses that I've been looking at. Currently, I use a 40D and XTi with my trusty Canon 300 mm f/4L and often a 1.4x TC. I have considered going to the Canon 300 mm f/2.8L, but I don't want to take the hit on my credit card - I'm a grad student - so I've been looking at other glass. I generally use my camera while working (i.e. walking around finding and monitoring bird nests), so a fixed 500 mm is out of the question simply for its size - as well as cash. So, beyond the obviously nice and sharp Canon 400 f/5.6L and the Canon 100-400 zoom, there seem to be two interesting options:
1) Sigma 50-500 mm 'Bigma'
and
2) Sigma 150-500 mm OS lens, a newer offering
I'm curious if anybody has used these lenses - I'm curious about recently purchased copies in particular (because Sigma is so weird on their QC) - for bird photography, and in particular, if you've used both, I'd love to hear about your experience. If you have a spare 300 mm f/2.8 or 500 mm f/4 laying around, you could always just give it to me and then this thread would be unnecessary.
Best,
Dan
I owned the 50-500mm "Bigma", but that was several years ago. I wasn't happy with it for several reasons, it did not have VR/IS was one, another is that the colors it produced just did not seem accurate to me. I sold it within just a few months of making the purchase.
I know that isn't much help for you since it was an older version, but that is my two cents.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08013103sigma120400.asp
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001B8YLZA/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_2?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B001542X5K&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=1BHGSC4HV5K6JR8QBCAF
http://www.pbase.com/isogood/sigma_120_400_os_hsm
Sandy r
The speed and clarity of this lens are mindblowing
I'd not consider either Siggie zoom for the reasons already stated. Sharp enough if no cropping takes place, but too soft for significant cropping. The 100-400 is sharper than either of the Siggies, and of course the 300, 400 and 500 primes are the sharpest of all mentioned here. I've taken 70 percent away from 8 Mp images shot with the 400 f5.6 and still gotten excellent 11x14 prints. Can't say the same any of the zooms in this lineup.
With the 300 f2.8/TC, you're at f4 wide open with great IQ from the combo, and you get a bit of flexibility in situations where you don't need the 400mm reach and can remove the TC). Also, on the xxD series cameras, when the center focus point is selected and the lens opens to f2.8 or wider max aperture, the body/lens combo offers increased AF precision. This is an excellent combo for sure.
Budget is a consideration for you, and the f4 and f2.8 versions of the 300 are both tack sharp, so all you'd be gaining with the upgrade is a single stop of speed. Unless you are a sports shooter, that stop isn't as important as technique and woodscraft. Plus, it's pretty heavy and big for you to cart around the woods checking nests.
When recommending either the 100-400 or the 400 f5.6 to clients, my primary question always is: Which is more important to you, extreme sharpness or zoom flexibility? Some additional points. While many avian photographers pursue tight portraits, the viewing public generally responds better to images of birds in beautiful environments, so the ability to zoom out is obvious. While both lenses weigh essentially the same, the 400 makes a significantly more compact package than the zoom (the 100-400 is an unwieldy push-pull design). And lastly, unless you're shooting in bright light or panning BIF shots, the 400 prime responds best off a monopod/tripod, since you don't have the benefit of either a fast aperture or IS. I've also gotten beautiful IQ out of the 400 prime with the 1.4 TC. AF will not be available at f8 on your body, but I've used this combo off a tripod shooting fixed locations like eagle and osprey nests, when manually focusing on a specific point and stopping down to, say, f11 in good light can get you really nice images. You can do the same thing on the 100-400, but IQ isn't as good with the TC because of the slight softness inherent in zooms vs primes.
Also, there's no need to buy new necessarily. I do most of my buying and selling on the "sell" classifieds board at Photography on the Net. It's a Canon-specific site, and a LOT of gear gets posted for sale there daily. I've bought and sold many items there over the last few years and have never had a bad experience either as buyer or seller. You should be able to find a lightly used 400 f5.6L for around $900-$950, the 100-400 for about $1,100 or so and the 300 f2.8 for about $3,500. Also, are you planning to sell your 300 f4 to fund the purchase of a different lens? If so, it'll bring about as much used as you'd pay for a used 400 f5.6, or you'd only end up shelling out a bit more if you opt for the 100-400. There are plenty of trades that go on in that board, too.
Whichever you choose, good luck out there and have a fun time!