Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM or Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX DG HSM?
11-10-2009, 10:41 AM
#1
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Fayetteville, North Carolina
Posts: 200
Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM or Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX DG HSM?
I'm currently on the market for a good zoom telephoto lense. But can't figure out which to get. I need to be able to shoot at long focal ranges and my 28-135mm isn't cutting it. I thought about the Canon 70-200mm f/4L, but I need more then 200mm to shoot with.
I've been looking at the Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM and the Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX DG HSM. Both seem like decent lenses and I've read several reviews on both of them. They both have their pluses and minues. Canon has the IS if I want to shoot handheld and has a faster app. at full zoom. The Sigma has a better app. zoomed all the way out and has more focal range then the Canon. The IS doesn't concern me that much, since I use a tripod most of the time. The app. issues don't concern me either, I've got a 50mm f/1.8II for all my depth of field stuff, and most of the time I use a smaller app. anyway due to it being so bright where I'm at.
The other big thing is price. The Sigma is just shy of $1100 and the Canon is almost $1700. Kinda of a big gap there.
If anyone has used either of these, please chime in and let me know how you liked them.
I've been looking at the Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM and the Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX DG HSM. Both seem like decent lenses and I've read several reviews on both of them. They both have their pluses and minues. Canon has the IS if I want to shoot handheld and has a faster app. at full zoom. The Sigma has a better app. zoomed all the way out and has more focal range then the Canon. The IS doesn't concern me that much, since I use a tripod most of the time. The app. issues don't concern me either, I've got a 50mm f/1.8II for all my depth of field stuff, and most of the time I use a smaller app. anyway due to it being so bright where I'm at.
The other big thing is price. The Sigma is just shy of $1100 and the Canon is almost $1700. Kinda of a big gap there.
If anyone has used either of these, please chime in and let me know how you liked them.
11-10-2009, 08:02 PM
#2
Senior Member
Fail, INC
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: CYN
Posts: 6,458
canon 100-400 hands down. the glass of it is superior than the sigma.
here is a quick search on POTN
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...rchid=13505804
here is a quick search on POTN
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...rchid=13505804
11-10-2009, 10:51 PM
#3
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 916
What do you plan to shoot with it? What body is the lens going on?
I have the 70-200m f/4L IS and absolutely love it. Because I like to shoot airplanes, I needed a bit of longer range so I picked up a Tamron Pro 1.4x TC. Now it does lower the lens by a stop, so the f/4 becomes a f/5.6 but usually I have really high shutter speeds anyway. But the 70-200 on my 500D becomes an "effective" focal length of 112-320mm (crop sensor). Once you add in the TC, it becomes 157-448mm "effectively".
So, a 157-448mm at a constant f/5.6 is quite nice... The TC does not effect the IQ at all (for me, at least) and my pictures are sharp as anything. I was blown away by a few this past weekend I went shooting at the zoo...
So something to think about! If you want a constant f/4, then you can get the 70-200mm f/2.8 and with the TC it will be a f/4 with the TC on... Don't be afraid of quality TC's... The Tamron PRO is excellent in every way. I got mine brand new, for $140 online (usually over $200) but I found a deal. Can't beat it!
I have the 70-200m f/4L IS and absolutely love it. Because I like to shoot airplanes, I needed a bit of longer range so I picked up a Tamron Pro 1.4x TC. Now it does lower the lens by a stop, so the f/4 becomes a f/5.6 but usually I have really high shutter speeds anyway. But the 70-200 on my 500D becomes an "effective" focal length of 112-320mm (crop sensor). Once you add in the TC, it becomes 157-448mm "effectively".
So, a 157-448mm at a constant f/5.6 is quite nice... The TC does not effect the IQ at all (for me, at least) and my pictures are sharp as anything. I was blown away by a few this past weekend I went shooting at the zoo...
So something to think about! If you want a constant f/4, then you can get the 70-200mm f/2.8 and with the TC it will be a f/4 with the TC on... Don't be afraid of quality TC's... The Tamron PRO is excellent in every way. I got mine brand new, for $140 online (usually over $200) but I found a deal. Can't beat it!
11-11-2009, 09:39 AM
#5
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Fayetteville, North Carolina
Posts: 200
The lense will be going on my 50D. CMOS crop sensor at 15.1MP. So, the camera can handle what ever I throw at it.
I do a lot of scenery right now with the lenses I have. I'm always the photographer at my companies parties. I do our company formation pics. Helicopters, from helicopters. Lots of stuff really. I just need a hell of a lot more reach then my 28-135mm. I'm trying to get pics of the island of my post and the towns right off post. Can't get close enough without getting barbed wire and fence line.
Looks like I'll be saving up for a Canon 100-400mm.
I do a lot of scenery right now with the lenses I have. I'm always the photographer at my companies parties. I do our company formation pics. Helicopters, from helicopters. Lots of stuff really. I just need a hell of a lot more reach then my 28-135mm. I'm trying to get pics of the island of my post and the towns right off post. Can't get close enough without getting barbed wire and fence line.
Looks like I'll be saving up for a Canon 100-400mm.
