Canon 100-400mm or Sigma 150-500mm

[Gill Blower]

If you had the choice....which would you buy? I have read some reviews and still don't know so I thought I would ask the experts at ADAPS.

I have a Canon 300mm but need a better lens as I plan to try nature photography and perhaps sports as well.

The Canon 100-400 is over £1k and the Sigma is currently £749 with £100 cash back (£649). The Sigma is 5.6f, the Canon is 4.5f.

Any ideas?

[mikeaspinall]

Some other things to consider Gill :-
Canon lens is 7.4 inches long and weighs 3lb whereas the Sigma is nearly 10 inches long and weighs a pound more. Big stuff!!
The Canon is the L lens (top of the range) but of course the Sigma is cheaper.
Tracey has the Canon and Jared might have the Sigma so why not ask them for a try out?
Perhaps a mint Canon is the other option?
Good hunting.

[John]

You also have replies on Facebook.

The consensus seems Canon so far!

[BydoR9]

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/tamro ... view-23866

Good advice from Mike. Have you considered the brand new Tamron 150-600? Its around £950 at the moment, so wait a few months and it should go down a bit in price. It's what I would buy (and I will in a year or 2 - wife doesn't know yet though).

Andy Butler.

[Gill Blower]

Thanks Mike....Andy I have enough problems choosing between 2 lenses and you throw another one into the mix.

Think I will probably stick with Canon....

[KEASLA]

I say go for the 100-400mm but canon also do a 400mm f5.6L prime (no is) or a 300mm f4L IS prime and you can add a 1.4x converter and still keep autofocus and the good thing about the 300mm is the close focus of 4.9ft where as the 400mm prime is 11.5ft and as these are primes they should sharper and focus faster

100-400mm new £1060

400mm new £935

300mm new £930

Canon 1.4x mkiii new £310

[BydoR9]

Its a tough choice as all suggestions have their pros and cons. Sorry that I threw my suggestion in and caused more confusion, but I would definitely consider it if you want do get into nature on a budget, especially if you want to shoot birds.

If you have the money and want quality then Canon lenses all the way, but the trade-off is less flexibilty with a fixed focal length and swapping teleconverters.The Tamron has a long range and great zoom flexibilty, and very good performance for the price. I would a least take the Sigma out of the running and think of the Tamron instead.

All just my opinion of course, other people's suggestions are all valid.

Andy.

[Tracey McGovern]

Hi Gill

I had the Sigma 150-500mm, bought it on line without seeing it first, went off good reviews but when it came I realised how big it actually was. Too big for me. I ended up buying a second hand Canon 100-400mm and selling the Sigma, to Gerry infact, which I believe he is happy with.

The Canon for me was a better choice, due to it's smaller size and weight, it meant I was more likely to take it out, which I have, it was the main lens I used in Africa before my camera packed in. With regard to the Sigma, apart from a few test shots, I never actually took it out anywhere, it was just too big - it was huge.

Hope this helps.

Tracey x

[Gill Blower]

Finally decided on the Canon 100-400. Been to Calumet and picked it up today.

Thanks for all your advice.

[Tracey McGovern]

Good choice, you won't be disappointed x

[John]

Fantastic, absolutely a fine choice.