Canon Digital Photography Forums  

Go Back   Canon Digital Photography Forums > 'Equipment Talk' section > Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Register Rules FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 19th of March 2011 (Sat)   #1
MikeZoo
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4
Default Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400

I'm in desperate need of a decent long zoom lens, but unfortunately I live a long way from any decent camera stores so I can't test any lens' out so I can see what performs best for me But what are your recommendations? I need it for wildlife photography mostly, to bring the action right to me, my current zoom lens just doesn't quite cut it, and what of teleconverters? 2x for my 55-250?

Your insights would be greatly appreciated!
__________________
Canon Powershot SX20 IS (SOLD), Canon EOS 550D (Rebel Kiss X4)
EFS 18-55mm IS, EFS 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS, EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
MikeZoo is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 19th of March 2011 (Sat)   #2
altitude604
Senior Member
 
altitude604's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
Posts: 1,658
Default Re: Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400

i wouldn't use a 2x or even a 1.4x on the 55-250. while it is a decent lens, the teleconverters would take a bite from the image quality.

you'd be better off with the 100-400L.
__________________
Erik - Three Miles Final

- Gear List -
altitude604 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2011 (Sat)   #3
katodog
Goldmember
 
katodog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Carol Stream, Illinois
Posts: 3,974
Default Re: Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400

Or you're better off with the 150-500mm OS, which has the same IQ as the 100-400mm, longer reach, better stabilization, and cheaper price.


The 100-400mm is a nice lens, but it can't get you 500mm, it doesn't have 4-stop stabilization, and it costs more. Don't be fooled by the fancy white paint job, the red rubber band, and "Canon" slapped on the side; the Sig is an equal in image quality, and superior in other aspects. But, either one would be a great lens to have.
__________________
The only stupid question is the one that goes unasked - Photographers shoot to thrill, not to kill

My Gear - Flickr - Facebook
Smoke Photography - Sound-Activated Paint

katodog is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 19th of March 2011 (Sat)   #4
duane0524
Goldmember
 
duane0524's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: South of Boston, MA
Posts: 4,784
Default Re: Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeZoo View Post
I'm in desperate need of a decent long zoom lens, but unfortunately I live a long way from any decent camera stores so I can't test any lens' out so I can see what performs best for me But what are your recommendations? I need it for wildlife photography mostly, to bring the action right to me, my current zoom lens just doesn't quite cut it, and what of teleconverters? 2x for my 55-250?

Your insights would be greatly appreciated!
Why don't you rent them to try them out before you buy one?
__________________
Canon 50D | Canon 17-55 | Canon 24-105 | Sigma 30 1.4 | Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II| Canon 85 1.8 | 430EXII| 580EX ll | ST-E2 | Canon TC 1.4x II | Benro Travel Angel C1682TB0

duane0524 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2011 (Sat)   #5
watt100
Cream of the Crop
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 13,549
Default Re: Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400

Quote:
Originally Posted by katodog View Post
Or you're better off with the 150-500mm OS, which has the same IQ as the 100-400mm, longer reach, better stabilization, and cheaper price.
Maybe the Sigma is better
... or maybe not!

http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/article...500_50-500.htm

http://www.michaelfurtman.com/sigma150_500.htm
watt100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2011 (Sat)   #6
katodog
Goldmember
 
katodog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Carol Stream, Illinois
Posts: 3,974
Default Re: Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400

I speak from experience with both lenses out in the real world, not from indoors with charts or shooting at static objects. Both lenses have identical IQ, and the Sig does have better stabilization, and it does have longer reach, and it is cheaper. Facts, my good man, facts.

If you saw similar shots from both lenses you couldn't tell which image was shot with which lens.


OF course I didn't toss up a fancy "lab test" website comparing the two, so I must be full of crap.
__________________
The only stupid question is the one that goes unasked - Photographers shoot to thrill, not to kill

My Gear - Flickr - Facebook
Smoke Photography - Sound-Activated Paint

katodog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2011 (Sat)   #7
MikeZoo
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4
Default Re: Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400

Awesome advice all, I think I'm going to go with the Sigma, on paper it seems the right choice, I can't wait to start shooting! Thanks all!
__________________
Canon Powershot SX20 IS (SOLD), Canon EOS 550D (Rebel Kiss X4)
EFS 18-55mm IS, EFS 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS, EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
MikeZoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2011 (Sat)   #8
gasrocks
Cream of the Crop
 
gasrocks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Portage, Wisconsin USA
Posts: 13,431
Default Re: Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400

For wildlife I also would get the Sigma. Let us all know how it worked out after you get it.
__________________
GEAR LIST
__________________
gasrocks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2011 (Sat)   #9
Shane W
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Traverse City, Michigan
Posts: 827
Default Re: Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400

I picked up the Sigma 150-500 after reading a bazillion posts and threads on here. Used 100-400L was still more than my budget and after looking at Katodog's stuff he has posted, I was convinced. I have been more than happy so far and only spending $750.00 on an almost new lens makes me even happier! I've said it before... "Thanks katodog for your help!" He knows both these lenses very well!
__________________
Shane W

70D | Sig 10-20 | EF-S 15-85 | EF 70-200 2.8L | Sig 150-500 | Viv 28 2.5 | Sig 30 | Tak 50 1.4 | EF 100 2.8 Macro | 1.4x TC | Nodal Ninja 3 | Tripods | Some Flashes | My flickr
Shane W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2011 (Sat)   #10
artyman
Cream of the Crop
 
artyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Hampshire UK
Posts: 14,234
Default Re: Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400

Yeah well the Sigma 150-500 can only produce shots like this, so you wouldn't wan to get saddled with a crappy lens like that would you Actually Either the Sigma or Canon 100-400 would give you similar results.

Crop
__________________
Art that takes you there. http://www.artyman.co.uk
Ken
Canon 7D, 350D, 15-85, 18-55, 75-300, Cosina 100 Macro, Sigma 120-300
artyman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2011 (Sat)   #11
Allan.L
Member
 
Allan.L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 977
Default Re: Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400

Quote:
Originally Posted by artyman View Post
Yeah well the Sigma 150-500 can only produce shots like this, so you wouldn't wan to get saddled with a crappy lens like that would you Actually Either the Sigma or Canon 100-400 would give you similar results.

Crop
Brilliant
__________________
Allan
Allan.L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2011 (Sat)   #12
katodog
Goldmember
 
katodog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Carol Stream, Illinois
Posts: 3,974
Default Re: Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400

Oh, so you want images, huh?? Okay...


First, the "fast enough to track an eagle in a dive" shot...


Jan 09 008 by Ed Durbin (Katodog), on Flickr



Then the typical "yup, that's a beautiful shot of a deer" shot...


Deer by Ed Durbin (Katodog), on Flickr


And we'll finish with a few "Holy Crap!! That is a fantastic lens" shots...


Jan 09 033 by Ed Durbin (Katodog), on Flickr


Jan 16 030 by Ed Durbin (Katodog), on Flickr


Feb 12 018 by Ed Durbin (Katodog), on Flickr


Feb 12 020 by Ed Durbin (Katodog), on Flickr




Okay, one more, the "this was shot with the 'inferior' lens" shot...


Jan 29 018 by Ed Durbin (Katodog), on Flickr
__________________
The only stupid question is the one that goes unasked - Photographers shoot to thrill, not to kill

My Gear - Flickr - Facebook
Smoke Photography - Sound-Activated Paint


Last edited by katodog : 10th of June 2012 (Sun) at 16:31.
katodog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2011 (Sat)   #13
DreDaze
Cream of the Crop
 
DreDaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
Posts: 14,619
Default Re: Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400

first off...no TC will fit the 55-250IS...

to answer your question though i think it mainly comes down to budget...the canon is nearly double the price of the 150-500mm...is it twice as good?...i don't think so, but if you've got the budget for it, maybe it's worth it to you...but think about it, you could practically have a 400L, and the sigma for the same price as the 100-400L
__________________
Andre or Dre
gear list
flickr
DreDaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2011 (Sat)   #14
GabooN
Member
 
GabooN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Windsor, Ontario
Posts: 148
Default Re: Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400

Amazing eagle shots there!
__________________
| Canon 40D | EF-S 18-55mm IS | EF 50mm f/1.8 II | EF-S 55-250mm IS | Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 | YN-468 Speedlite | RF-602 Remote Trigger | WhiBal |
flickr
GabooN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2011 (Sat)   #15
Beachcomber Joe
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Southwest Florida
Posts: 458
Default Re: Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400

I went through the same decision a little over a year ago. In my personal real world comparison I found that the Canon 100-400L had slightly better image quality when pixel peeping. It also gave the impression of better build quality. The Sigma 150-500 had faster auto focusing and light years better stabilization. Plus the Sigma gives you an extra 100mm of reach (160mm on a crop body). With BIF and wildlife, the Sigma's reach, ability to fast autofocus, and better stabilization far outweigh the minor difference in IQ. I purchased the Sigma 150-500.
Beachcomber Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:58.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This forum is not affiliated with Canon in any way and is run as a free user helpsite by Pekka Saarinen, Helsinki Finland. You will need to register in order to be able to post messages. Cookies are required for registering and posting. HTML in messages is not allowed, plain website addresses are automatically made active by the board.