Comments on the Sigma 135-400

[alan sh]

Having just tried a Sigma 170-500 on my 20D (and liked it), has anyone got any comments (good or bad) about the 135-400 ?

I found the 500 end of the 17-500 a but non-sharp - partly due to my not being able to hold it steady at 1/1000th speed.... So, I am thinking of the 135-400.

Any comments welcomed

Alan

[alan sh]

Forget it - found some. Looks like a Sigma 100-300 and a 1.4TC is a better option.

Alan

[condyk]

Does that mean it's no good, as I was looking into that model too?

[alan sh]

Its OK - but a 100-300 gives me a constant F4 and a high quality lens. I can then use the 1.4x converter to give me 140-420 at a constant F5.6 so I will achieve autofocus at all lengths.

The 135-400 is given good ratings at low(ish) lengths but above 250 is supposed to be not so good.

I tried the 170-500 and at 500 I was getting inconsistant results - even at 1/100th of a second.

I realise that money may be an issue - I'm looking at my bank balance as we speak !

Alan

[CyberDyneSystems]

Forget it - found some. Looks like a Sigma 100-300 and a 1.4TC is a better option.

Alan

This is a much much much better option! :)