PDA

View Full Version : safari lens choice


cyruz
15th of June 2009 (Mon), 16:27
well im 6 weeks out now and want to pick up the lens soon so i can play with it a bit before I go. im looking at either the canon 100-400L or the Sigma APO 120-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG OS HSM.

anyone have experience with both or used the sigma at all?

AlistairD
15th of June 2009 (Mon), 16:50
Hi,
I started a similar thread (though not about the Sigma Lens you talk about) but thought it might make interesting reading for you...

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=690211

cyruz
15th of June 2009 (Mon), 17:11
hey thanks

jrntr6
15th of June 2009 (Mon), 22:51
Just curious, is there a reason you're considering the sigma 120-400 os but not the 150-500 os?... i just assume that since it's still less expensive then the canon the extra 100mm would immediatly make it an option

cyruz
16th of June 2009 (Tue), 04:55
I actually am also considering it after reading some of the onine reviews. It's a big lens and I'm not sure about the f/. It's not going to do as well in the low morning and afternoon/dusk light

jrntr6
16th of June 2009 (Tue), 11:24
well on the topic of shake, one thing to consider, it is only 1/3 of a stop slower then the canon but the os is 1-2 stops better then the canon (though it is louder) so if you are shooting static animals in low light the sigma presumably is better...

Honestly i have never used the canon 100-400, but i have used the 70-200l IS and compared to my 150-500 i found the he canon IS noticably less effective... I would suggest going to a store and trying a side by side comparison. I believe the 100-400 has the same generation IS as the 70-200

condyk
20th of June 2009 (Sat), 03:16
I actually am also considering it after reading some of the onine reviews. It's a big lens and I'm not sure about the f/. It's not going to do as well in the low morning and afternoon/dusk light

All your best shots will come not at dawn or dust but just after and before. As the sun starts to rise or set the light is perfect. Just study it over the first day or so. You will see it has a warm, golden glow with superb colour and contrast. That is the time to shoot. I normally don't bother at other times. I would if there was an exceptional scene, but that is likely very infrequent. Buy for what you need 95% of the time rather than the by chance last 5%.

mlc
25th of June 2009 (Thu), 18:29
If I am shooting using my 50D (15mp) compared to, say, a 40D (10.1mp) and I crop my final shot to the same number of pixels as the 40D presumably my 300mm becomes equivalent to 300*(15/10.1)^.5 = c365mm. Is this right or am I missing something?

Thanks

Gibbo
25th of June 2009 (Thu), 19:32
I think the 100-400 is your safest bet and probably what most people will recommend for safari trips.

Very versatile and IQ is superb. On your 40d it will be even longer, so there won't be many times you will be wishing for more reach.

Wildcats
1st of September 2009 (Tue), 14:56
I'm a total beginner but in doing some online research about doing a photography safari many people seem to recommend using a 1.4X extender. Could you even use this with the 100-400?

biswasg
1st of September 2009 (Tue), 15:36
I'm a total beginner but in doing some online research about doing a photography safari many people seem to recommend using a 1.4X extender. Could you even use this with the 100-400?

A 1.4x can be used with the Canon's 100-400mm f 4.5-5.6 lens. However, one must note that this will disable auto focusing on all Canon bodies except the 1D series.

buddy4344
1st of September 2009 (Tue), 15:42
I have two 1-4's and both a Sigma and Canon 1.4x. Trust me, you really don't want to use the TCon on the 100-400 unless desparate. Manual focus, High f-stops and fairly soft images on a 30D and 50D. May be a different story on a 1D family or 5D family.

BTW, the 100-400 Canon outnumbers the Sigma about 10 to 1 when you get out there. Canon can be sharp. need a good copy and is small enough and quick to zoom. Last trip I had one as well as a 400 DO, which I planned to use in conjunction with my 1.4x Tcon. turned out I almost always had the 1-4 on the body one body (I had a 500 on the other body, so not exactly a bankable statement)

cyruz
1st of September 2009 (Tue), 16:44
i went with the 1-4 instead of the sigma. i think i got a good copy. its shapr and im really happy with it. its a light whore though and you will have to crank up the iso if the animals are in the shade at all.

Cyclop
2nd of September 2009 (Wed), 08:41
I would recommend getting a lens with the "longest" reach possible for obvious safety reasons of course...

BradM
2nd of September 2009 (Wed), 22:20
I have two 1-4's and both a Sigma and Canon 1.4x. Trust me, you really don't want to use the TCon on the 100-400 unless desparate. Manual focus, High f-stops and fairly soft images on a 30D and 50D. May be a different story on a 1D family or 5D family.

BTW, the 100-400 Canon outnumbers the Sigma about 10 to 1 when you get out there. Canon can be sharp. need a good copy and is small enough and quick to zoom. Last trip I had one as well as a 400 DO, which I planned to use in conjunction with my 1.4x Tcon. turned out I almost always had the 1-4 on the body one body (I had a 500 on the other body, so not exactly a bankable statement)

There are a hell of a lot more good copies of the 100-400mm than there are bad. In my personal experience with close to a dozen of these lens that the owners believed to be bad, in each and every case it was the shooter and not the glass.

The biggest issue with this lens (and almost all for that matter) is it really doesn't shine until stopped down, from f/7.1 to f/9 is usually the sweet spot. Shooting wide open costs more detail for the shutter speed than going an extra step up in the ISO and staying in the sharpest part of the lens does.

Wildcats
6th of September 2009 (Sun), 09:17
One more question: Why would someone buy a 400mm vs a 100-400mm lens?

buddy4344
6th of September 2009 (Sun), 10:18
I have the 400 DO. Beautiful, but expensive. Slightly sharper than my 100-400, but it will autofocus with a Teleconverter. Though both are good glass, last safari, the less expensive 100-400 got much more use.

Wildcats
7th of September 2009 (Mon), 10:34
Thanks for the response Buddy4344, very good to know about the 400 vs the 100-400. I am definitely leaning towards buying a 100-400mm for our safaris.

Tom Reichner
8th of September 2009 (Tue), 17:06
One more question: Why would someone buy a 400mm vs a 100-400mm lens?

Because prime lenses often yield slightly better image quality than zooms. If you print you images out at a very large size, and still insist that they be very sharp, the prime will often prove to be a slightly better choice.

Also the more expensive primes offer larger apertures than the zooms offer. One exception is Nikon's wonderful 200-400 f4 zoom. Unfortunately, Canon does not offer a comparable lens.

KevinA
11th of October 2009 (Sun), 04:52
I think the 100-400 is your safest bet and probably what most people will recommend for safari trips.

Very versatile and IQ is superb...

I keep seeing IQ on posts. What is it?

BradM
11th of October 2009 (Sun), 10:14
I keep seeing IQ on posts. What is it?

Image Quality

KevinA
19th of October 2009 (Mon), 16:34
Image Quality


Doh!!

Cheers

duxbar
20th of October 2009 (Tue), 13:57
I think the 100-400 is your safest bet and probably what most people will recommend for safari trips.

Very versatile and IQ is superb. On your 40d it will be even longer, so there won't be many times you will be wishing for more reach.

I agree, 100-400 is a default pick.

c75mitch
24th of October 2009 (Sat), 14:30
100 - 400 is a great lens. I found the AF on the canon to be much faster than the Sigma.

I would go for the 100-400, in fact I did :)

cyruz
24th of October 2009 (Sat), 16:32
i would only bring a long prime if i had a longer telezoom with me as well. every time i changed lenses over there, i paid for it dearly that night cleaning the sensor. not worth the hassle IMO