Which lens: 80-400 or 50-500?

[sidster]

I'm looking to purchase either of these two lenses in the next couple of
months:
Sigma 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 EX OS (http://www.sigmaphoto.com/html/pages/80-400os.htm) or 50-500 f/4-6.3 EX Apo RF HSM (http://www.sigmaphoto.com/html/pages/50_500_EX.HTM)

My main goal is to do some motor sports photography in the near future.
I've been weighing the pros and cons of each of these lenses. For example,
I like the HSM motor of the 50-500 which also gives me full-time manual
focus capability. On the other hand the Optical Stabilizer of the 80-400
lens would be very useful in reducing camera shake at 400mm focal length
and hand-held operation.

Prices for both is somewhat similar (depending where you shop). Max
difference is about $220 USD or so. The 80-400mm lens being the more
expensive one.

I thought I'd see what others have to advise.

Thanks for all your comments in advance! :)

--patrick

[J.A.F. Doorhof]

You can alway's use a 1.4 TC offcourse on 80-400.
I choose 80-400OS because I really need the OS, I don't want to drag a tripod with me all the time and now I can shoot at 400 (even with the 1.4TC connected) at shuttertimes of min 1/125 and still get good results.
The HSM is offcourse nice but when used to the normal focus engine I see no problem, and yes I shoot birds in flight and soccer with this lens :D.

[KennyG]

Patrick, I tried the 80-400 for a full day at the circuit and the lack of HSM really let it down. I don't know how they dare advertise it as suitable for motorsport as it can't cope with AF tracking at high speed, which is essential.

[blackviolet]

in my testing between the two, i found the 50-500 was much faster to focus and just felt more comfortable to use. picture quality was pretty close. it (the bigma) is now my primary lens for daytime team sports.


i would definitely defer to the motor guys for the suitability to your needs... btw, the last time i checked, they were very close in price. but you would be very close to the 100-400L IS....

[CyberDyneSystems]

The 50-500mm with the HSM motor is truly a very fast to focus lens.. I would contend that it was faster than even the 100-400mm on my 10D.. though I'm sure many will debate this,..

(to clarify.. the 50-500mm was amazingly agile at tracking focus of very small objects in flight, birds (and DragonFlys! no less),... the 100-400mm, though fast to focus in general.. I find is not as good at tracking birds in flight)

Pricewise you are now so close to 100-400mm L IS territory I would say it worth the extra $$ for sure...

Narrow your choice to Canon 100-400mm vs. Sigma 50-500mm,. in which case you would be sacrificing IS and Canon glass for that extra 100mm... or sacrifing that extra 100mm to gain IS and reduce the wightload dramtically!

This should make you choice more discernable. Both are pretty quick to focus,..

[khiromu]

It may not be quite long enough, but how about Sigma100-300/4? I heard good thing about this lens. It also works (from what I saw) well with TCs. And it is cheaper than those two lenses in your list.

[davidwegs]

80-400 of the two.

[sidster]

Very informative and interesting comments all. Thank you.

Even though I am not yet 100% sure that I will be getting the 50-500mm
Sigma, I think comments by KennyG and CyberDyneSystems about fast AF
and tracking has pretty much convinced me that this lens for my need (mostly
because of its HSM system).

I probably should rent these lens for a weekend and test them out myself
before committing to a purchase.

--patrick

[heycow]

I know I'm resurrecting a very old thread, but just curious which lens you ended up getting and if you were/are happy with your decision.

[andydajo]

Don't know what your budget is but I'd plum for the EF 100-400 L IS. It's a beaut!!

[gasrocks]

There are a lot of threads about motor sport pictures. Read them for rmore info. I do not remember anyone mentioning the 50-500 being used.

[ScottE]

The only reason I would get the 80-400 would be the OS if I did much hand held photography.

The 50-500 is shorter at the long end, longer at the long end, has faster and quieter autofocus and has full time manual override.

As far as I know, the optical quality of both lenses is about the same (very good).

Since my main use of this lens is wildlife photography shot from a tripod, the 50-500 is better for my purposes. I also use it fairly often for sports and am glad I have the faster autofocus, although it would be nice to have the OS on occasions when light is low and I have to use a slower shutter speed.

Scott