Sigma or Canon?

[fox1]

Sigma AF 4.5-5.6 135-400mm APO or Canon 4. 5.6 75-300mm USM III ?

I'm thinking in terms of the 200-300-400mm ends of
these lens.

[IanD]

Fox,
If possible take a look at the Sigms 100-300 f4. It was highly recommended to me by others here and I picked it up. Stunning results when I do my part. It is not the smallest or lightest lens in the world but worth the extra effort to carry it around. Anyway, Tom has a spare beast of burden he freely lends folks with this lens.
Ian

[Belmondo]

I'm not familiar with the Sigma lenses that you mention, but I do have the Canon lens. It's decent, but not great. I've since bought the Canon 100-400, and really have little use for the 75-300 anymore. For the price, you really can't beat it, I suppose, although knowing what I know now, I proabably would have held out for something better---maybe even the 70-200 f/4 which will work quite well with Canon extenders, although a little slow in that configuration.

As for my beast of burden, I haven't seen him in over a week. I loaned him to someone in Montreal to carry around their big Sigmas lens, and they haven't sent him back yet, regardless of what they say.

If you should see my beast of burden, his name is BoB.

Good luck.

Tom

[fox1]

The last thing I want is a beast of burden. I'm in
my sixties with a dodgy left hand.

I don't tramp around much and rarely go more than a
few yards from my car.

I do need extra reach beyond 300mm though - within
a zoom range.

Any recommendations out there.?

[Belmondo]

fox1:
That could be me you just described. I'm also in my sixties and do very little walking around, although I proabably should do more.

You really might want to look at the Canon 100-400 for a couple reasons. It does have the range beyond 300 that you seek, and with Canon extenders, can go quite a bit further, although it will be a little slow. The other thing that might be of interest to you is that it's a push/pull zoom as opposed to the more contemporary 'twist' designs. I'm not sure what a 'dodgy' left hand is, but if you have any difficulty gripping things, this could be a real blessing.

Good luck.

Tom

[Phil Hall]

I second the 100-400 and throw in a 1.4x and you would not have to leave your car.

[fox1]

belmondo wrote:
fox1:
That could be me you just described. I'm also in my sixties and do very little walking around, although I proabably should do more.

I have looked at the Canon 100-400mm but £800
is a bit OTT. I'm visiting my daughter in Idaho next March/April and could go that way.

It's a real quandary..I curse Canon for putting a 100-400mm lens out of the reach of senior citizen's pockets.

OK, I have an expensive 10D, I may be a bit hypocritical
but that's my two cents worth...

[fox1]

Phil Hall wrote:
I second the 100-400 and throw in a 1.4x and you would not have to leave your car.


I had a stroke 6 years ago and it cut my mobility somewhat. I'm not a pro and obviously I'm not cutting my cloth to suit my budget - no pun intended! :-)

I do however want the best I can get.

I'm not complaining, I just feel that Canon could come up with a budget 100-400mm, if they can do a 75-300mm why not a zoom with a longer reach?