Canon 300 f2.8L+2x or Sigma 500 f4.5+1.4x for birds

[manutremo]

I have the opportunity to by one of these combinations second hand. What would you prefer for bird photo?

- Canon 300mm f2.8L (no IS) + 2x Canon TC

- Sigma 500 f4.5 HSM + Sigma 1.4x TC


WIll the shorter reach of the Canon combination (700 mm vs 600mm) be worth the image quality?

Thanks for your advice

[Mark Kemp]

I am not an expert on bird photography, but I have a go from time to time as my family are into ornithology and I live near the Slimbridge bird reserve.

What I have discovered is that birds are very small and very far away, so basically the longer the lens the more chance you have that the bird is not a little dot.

Of course if you are in a hide and can get the birds relatively close it is much easier. But even so I usually use a 400mm and often with a 1.4x converter in the hides at Slimbridge and they are still pretty small and the quality has obviously suffered a bit.

I doubt if there is much difference between the combinations that you suggest. In practice if you get the 600mm combination you could just enlarge the image in the computer by 7/6 and end up with something that looked very similar to the 700mm, but slightly worse optical quality, combination.

How about the 500mm, a 1.4x and a 2x converter even if its just a cheap one. Then you can use longer and longer combinations as you require. Admittedly the quality won't be very good at the longest ranges, but at least you may get a shot where the bird is recognisable.

[sGu]

definitely 300mm f2.8 IS+2xTC.

with that combination, you'll have a larger aperture than 500mmf4.5+1.4x, it'll help you in low light conditions also faster shutter to capture action during the day. also you'll be able to use autofocus on 1D/1D MK II/1Ds bodies with that, and picture quality would be sharper than sigma.

despite the 100mm difference in focal length, canon one is a much better choice, IMO, if cost doesn't vary too much from sigma .

[Mark Kemp]

I think sGU did make a good point. I still don't think there will be a lot of quality difference from the two combinations, but the Canon lens will be better when you are not using a TC. Plus you get to keep the autofocus. I would still look at a a 2x TC as well though.

[scottbergerphoto]

The 2X teleconverter costs you 2 stops and a significant deterioration in image quality, much more so then the 1.4. I have the Sigma 500mm f/4.5 EX APO HSM. It's a stellar performer. The Canon 300 f/4 non IS is a great lens but is too short and the image will suffer with the 2X. The image quality of the 300 f/4 plus 2x is inferior to the 500 f/4.5 +1.4. I returned one for that reason. I recommend you go with the Sigma 500 and the 1.4.

Here are three examples with the Sigma:

http://www.pbase.com/image/26490952.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/26490954.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/28637982.jpg

Regards,
Scott

[dn7elson]

Which camera you are using will play into this decision as well.

The f2.8 with 2X will autofocus on all Canon cameras. The f4.5 with 1.4X will not autofocus on the DRebel or 10D.

[CyberDyneSystems]

A lot to consider.

If birds are the main use for this lens .. then I have to disagree with some of the opinions here.

For birds you will want the 500mm lens .. at 500mm it will give better image quality than the 300mm with a 2X T-con. Really no question about it.

Before I could make such a decision though,. I would need more info.

1. What camera will it be used on?
2. What are the costs of these two packages?

So ,. some things to consider;

As mentioned,. the Sigma will only AF with a 1.4X T-con on a "1" Series body. So depending on your camera,. you may be comparing the Sigma at 500mm,.. not 700mm with a T-con.

The resale value of a used Canon 300mm f/2.8 is substantially higher than the Sigma. If these two packages are priced similar,. then the Canon is a steal, or the Sigma is over priced (it should sell for no more than $2,100.00 used)

If you think you may have use for a 300mm f/2.8 without a t-con a reasonable percentage fo the time.. then this obviously plays a large consideration in your decision.

Many budding wildlife photogs have made the mistake of trying a 300mm f/2.8 as there primary lens in the beginning. If they really take it seriously,. let me assure you,. they WILL end up with a 500mm or 600mm down the road.

Hope this helps.

[scottbergerphoto]

A lot to consider.

If birds are the main use for this lens .. then I have to disagree with some of the opinions here.

For birds you will want the 500mm lens .. at 500mm it will give better image quality than the 300mm with a 2X T-con. Really no question about it.


Disagree? I think you quoted me! :D
Regards,
Scott

[manutremo]

Thank you all for your answers:

I'll be using the lens with a Canon 10D. The prices are:

- Canon 300 f2.8L + Canon 1.4xII + Canon 2xII: 2500 EUR
- Sigma 500 f4.5+Sigma1.4x: 2300 EUR

Do you really think the Sigma is overpriced?

Also, I've been told that the Sigma can still AF if I tape the contacts in the TC. Any of you has experience with this?

I understand that anyway the Canon + 2x (f5.6) will always need less light than the Sigma. My worry is more about image quality between the two combinations.

[dn7elson]

Also, I've been told that the Sigma can still AF if I tape the contacts in the TC. Any of you has experience with this?

My take on the taping, given what I see at f5.6 with my Canon 70-200f4L is that the AF slows, but still works reliably at f5.6. Anything smaller than that may or may not work reliably.

The Canon 1.4X tells the body that there is an extender installed and it will not AF below f5.6 on the DRebel and 10D (without the tape that cuts this communication to the body).

So, if you don't have a problem with manual focusing what you are going to shoot, make the choice based upon that. If you want full zoom AF, figure that you likely will not be satisfied, particularly for action shots with the tape "solution".

Like most decisions, it will be a combination of economics and specific intended use that leads to the choice.

[scottbergerphoto]

Thank you all for your answers:

Do you really think the Sigma is overpriced?
No. It was $1500 cheaper then the Canon and I don't plan to resell it.

My worry is more about image quality between the two combinations.
The image quality with the Sigma + 1.4X is superior. 2X TC's reduce image quality much more so then 1.4X.

Regards,
Scott

[CyberDyneSystems]

manutremo

As Scottberger mentions.. around here the Canon lens goes for a good $1,500.00 US dollars more new.. and then the sigma looses resale value used.. therefore here in the US,. the two lenses would be priced SIGNIFICANTLY differently used..

I am not at all sure what a used 300mm f/2.8 should go for in "euros" but it seems to me that the Canon is priced better in this case. (I have however noticed that in Europe the "good" Sigma's like this lens retain there resale value more than they do here in the US)

Regarding the "tape trick" if ANY lens should work with the tape trick,. the 500mm f/4.5 SHOULD,. (it's only .5 off right? where as many have a good luck with f/5.6 lenses?)

HOWEVER just be forwarned.. this combo DID NOT work for me on my 10D! It would occasionally acheive perfect focus quickly.. just like without the taped T-con.. but most of the time.. under even perfect lighting conditions.. it would just hunt and stutter.. so much that I was concerned I would burn out the foucs motor. Do not "expect" the tape trick to work. Try it,. and see,. but don't bank on it.

O-kay,. so I'm not saying that you should be concerned about resale value as part of your purchase decision,. my only thought is that the Used Sigma in this case MAY be a little over priced.. where as the Canon may not be..

Still for Wildlife,. I'd want a 500mm ver any 300mm

So it's a tough call.

[CyberDyneSystems]

A lot to consider.

If birds are the main use for this lens .. then I have to disagree with some of the opinions here.

For birds you will want the 500mm lens .. at 500mm it will give better image quality than the 300mm with a 2X T-con. Really no question about it.


Disagree? I think you quoted me! :D
Regards,
Scott

:) "...disagree with some..."

"Some" is that your middle name? :lol: :lol:

No,. your points I obviously agree with!

[CyberDyneSystems]

At Jessops,.

the Canon sells for £4019.90
the Sigma sells for £1979.90

So,.. even though I know £ are not Euro.. you can see that the Canon sells for double the Sigma in the UK anyway..

So your decision . as Dale mentiaons .. is made significantly tougher given the economics.

[Mark Kemp]

Just to clarify, I never suggested a 2X TC instead of a 1.4 :roll: I meant as well as (even a cheap one will give you some chance of a shot when you otherwise would have no hope) and with the Sigma for the longest possible reach. Unless you only plan to photograph golden eagles and large owls you will need a phenomenal amount of magnification to get anything at a decent size in the frame.

But also consider that the Canon is a better basic lens when you don't need the TC and you keep autofocus with the 1.4 - either of which may be more important considerations for you.

[adamsti]

You guys are getting confused, he is asking about the 2.8L not the 4L, 300mm. The 2.8L IS is $3800, not $1500. (Sorry I guess I read it wrong, the Canon is $1500 more that the Sigma). If you want a 500mm at 4.5, find an old Canon 500, 4.5 and buy it used. They are hard to find but they are out there.

If you do a search on naturescapes.net, you will find that the 300mm 2.8L IS is highly, highly rated. One of the best pieces of glass Canon has ever made, and very useable with a 2X on it. The longer primes of 500 f/4, and 600 f/4 are preferred, but the 300 with the 2X will do in a pinch, and cheaper than the 500 and 600 lenses.

[scottbergerphoto]

You guys are getting confused, he is asking about the 2.8L not the 4L, 300mm. The 2.8L IS is $3800, not $1500. (Sorry I guess I read it wrong, the Canon is $1500 more that the Sigma). If you want a 500mm at 4.5, find an old Canon 500, 4.5 and buy it used. They are hard to find but they are out there.

If you do a search on naturescapes.net, you will find that the 300mm 2.8L IS is highly, highly rated. One of the best pieces of glass Canon has ever made, and very useable with a 2X on it. The longer primes of 500 f/4, and 600 f/4 are preferred, but the 300 with the 2X will do in a pinch, and cheaper than the 500 and 600 lenses.
I'm not trying to get in your face here, but from your equipment list it appears that you don't use the combination of the 300 f/2.8 IS L + 2X TC. I have used the combination and it stinks. The 300 2.8 IS L is inferior to the old 300 2.8 non IS ( www.photodo.com ). The pictures using the combination are grainy and lack contrast and saturation. I returned a 300 f/2.8 IS L to B&H and bought a 400 f/4.5. It is a much better lens. I use the 2X only when I need the reach and the quality of the image is secondary.
Scott

[adamsti]

No problem here, just pointing out that many people have had much more luck with that combo than you have. All of them prefer the 500, and 600, but if budget does not allow, and you want to stick with Canon, you don't have much choice but the 300 2.8, or a used 500 4.5L. If your not tied to Canon then the choice of the Sigma 500 4.5 is obvious.

No I can't afford the 2.8L, but I did have it's little brother f/4L, and it was really unusable with a 2X, but the 2.8 is a whole different animal.

[cspratt]

I have the Canon 300LF/4 IS and the Canon 1.4x. This combo, on my 10D, is just about adequate for taking bird images as the lens often "searches" for focus depending on lighting conditions. I got the Canon 100-400L IS which is far superior to the 300L with the 1.4x. I've also got the Sigma F/8 600 mirror lens which is a manual lens and have had some success with it. It is small and light but the lack of AF makes it hard to use on moving targets.

Arthur Morris often stacks his converters using a short extension tube in between. He has 500 and 600 lenses. These are very expensive, very heavy and I feel cumbersome. He does get some great shots though!

For bird it seems that bigger is better. The "stand-alone" 500 Sigma might be okay if one gets a fast AF.