Lenses canon v sigma

[garethm566]

I'm going to upgrade to a super telephoto lens and am undecided between the canon 100 - 400mm and the sigma 150 - 500mm each has pros and cons,I have a canon 500D but want to upgrade to a 7D,any advice would be helpful

 

[KmH]

This Sticky thread, that a lot of people somehow miss, is right above the thread you started on the Digital Discussions and Q&A forum thread listings page:

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...iscussion-please-read-lenses-not-digital.html

So I have moved the thread to the Photography Equipment and Products forum.

 

[DannyLewis]

I have the canon 100-400mm and am pleased with it. . My canon has very sharp crisp pictures I just don't use it much because of the weight...I have never used the Sigma but have heard that some had to be sent in to be adjusted as soon as the person received it. JMO..Go Canon....

 

[SCraig]

I have the Sigma 150-500 and love it although it has two disadvantages. One is its weight. At 4 pounds it is not a lightweight lens. Two is that it needs a lot of light. It is a rather slow lens at f/5-6.3 but more than that in low-contrast conditions it just doesn't seem to perform very well. Focus and contrast are both somewhat soft. Give it plenty of light and it does a great job. If I had to buy it again I would certainly do so because for the price it is an excellent lens, it's just one that has to be used within its limitations.

 

[Dubaiian]

Gotta agree with SCraig. I used to own the Sigma 150-500 before I purchased my Canon 100-400. In high contrast situations the Sigma worked perfectly well and provided me with some good images for well lit outdoor sports. The problem came when I was first on safari in Kenya where a common shot is a lion or cheetah in long similarly coloured grass. 9 times out of 10 I had to carefully manually focus the sigma and even then it was my judgement rather than the cameras ( no focus beep).

Since having the canon I can generally autofocus in all but the lowest light and get a significantly higher number of keepers which makes it worth the money in my eyes.

I strongly suggest trying the lens if you can because if your shooting involves high contrast subjects the Sigma may do a good job and save you significant funds. The final point I would add ( and its been discussed many times) is the push pull zoom on the Canon. It really does take quiet some time to get fully used to it and confident n what yo are doing.

Just my opinion and I hope you get what works well for you.

 

[table1349]

[h=2]Lenses canon v sigma[/h]
Canon wins in the 7th round with a wicked left hook to Sigma's gold ring.

 

[teribithia]

Any one owns them too can give any advice?

 

[STIC]

...

 

[Tony S]

I like the Canon 100-400...... and for those of you whining about the weight issue, I really like it when I don't need the extra speed of the 11 pound 400 2.8IS. It's like carrying a P&S after lugging the big monster around.

 

[gw2424]

The 100-400 has a quite a bit higher resale value.

 

[SCraig]

The 100-400 has a quite a bit higher resale value.

The 150-500 has quite a bit lower PURCHASE value.

 

[gw2424]

The 100-400 has a quite a bit higher resale value.

The 150-500 has quite a bit lower PURCHASE value.

I was referring to the value proportionally.

 

[SCraig]

I was referring to the value proportionally.

So was I.
Canon 100-400 L New ~ $1600, Used ~ $1200 = 0.75%
Sigma 150-500 New ~$1050, Used ~ $800 = 0.76%

 

[gw2424]

I was referring to the value proportionally.

So was I.
Canon 100-400 L New ~ $1600, Used ~ $1200 = 0.75%
Sigma 150-500 New ~$1050, Used ~ $800 = 0.76%

$1400 new on Amazon

 

[gw2424]

Add it to your cart

Amazon.com: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras: CANON: Camera & Photo