LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Sigma 50-500 vs. Canon 100-400L IS . . .

FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 07 Feb 2005 (Monday) 18:58   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
RJSorensen
Goldmember
RJSorensen's Avatar
Joined Sep 2004
1,706 posts
Near Tin Cup, Wyoming, USA
[MORE/SHARE]

I have been using the Sigma 50-500 for the past few weeks now and today my Canon 100-400L IS came via UPS from B&H. I know many of you are much like me, in trying to work out which of the longer lens to get and or save up for. I have only taken a few hundred shots with it but I have some thoughts regarding this pair of lens to share.

•Sigma costs less, but weighs more, 1.1 pound.
•Viewfinder seems to be brighter with the Canon lens.
•Canon seems to focus much faster & on what I aimed it at.
•The IS feature is very nice with hand helds.
•The Canon pans much easier for me.
•The Canon balance seems much nicer for me.
•In similar light the Canon works much better/quicker.
•IMO the photographs taken w/Canon are MUCH sharper.
•Color is better & brighter for same subjects w/Canon.
•Object detail is better and or more refined ie. feather details w/Canon.
•I miss the extra 100mm of the Sigma 50-500.
•Build of the Canon is just better. (My first L lens)
•The build of the Sigma . . . wiggled near the mount on the copy I used. But is generally robust.
•I don't like the focus ring and tension ring layout on the Canon lens . . . adjusting focus changes tension.

I am thusly very pleased with the Canon all in all . . . even at a shorter mm length. I could use a 1200mm very easy. LOL!

Just my thought from the first days shoot. I have a couple of shots up in the Nature forum if you would like to see. Everything prior to today was taken with the Sigma 50-500 BigMa. I returned the lens this evening to my friend whom lent it to me. Thanks Jim for the loan.

I hope that this can help those of you whom are looking for long lens . . . good luck. Keep shooting!

Post #1, Feb 07, 2005 18:58:50


"With Some Practice . . . I Am Able to Believe Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast!"
5D, 20D, EF 50 f/1.4, EF 16-35 L, EF-S 17-85, EF 24-70 L, EF 100-400 L, 1.4 TC II, Tubes, 550 EX, 580 EX.

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
tim
Light Bringer
tim's Avatar
Joined Nov 2004
49,520 posts
Wellington, New Zealand
[MORE/SHARE]

RJSorensen wrote:
•The balance seems much nicer.
•IMO the photographs taken are MUCH sharper.
•Color is better & brighter for same subjects.
•Object detail is better and or refined ie. feather details.

You might like to clarify which lens you're talking about in the above four points. I think you mean the Canon, but since you're talking about both i'm not sure.

Post #2, Feb 07, 2005 19:08:44


NZIPP Qualified Professional wedding photographer.
Wellington Wedding Photographerexternal link ~ Camera and Lens Reviewsexternal link ~ Photographers Tech Supportexternal link
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

LOG IN TO REPLY
RJSorensen
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
RJSorensen's Avatar
Joined Sep 2004
1,706 posts
Near Tin Cup, Wyoming, USA
[MORE/SHARE]

Sorry Tim, Yes they all refer to the Canon 100-400L IS.

I have updated the original posting to reflect Tim's suggestions.

Post #3, Feb 07, 2005 19:28:49


"With Some Practice . . . I Am Able to Believe Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast!"
5D, 20D, EF 50 f/1.4, EF 16-35 L, EF-S 17-85, EF 24-70 L, EF 100-400 L, 1.4 TC II, Tubes, 550 EX, 580 EX.

LOG IN TO REPLY
Adam ­ Hicks
Senior Member
Adam Hicks's Avatar
Joined Apr 2004
952 posts
Ft. Worth, TX
[MORE/SHARE]

I only borrowed a 50-500 once or twice, but boy did I miss my IS (especially since I was just shooting at the zoo!) Your panning comment is dead on as well, use the IS Mode 2 to turn off the horizontal stabilization and pan away!

It's a fantastic lens, and is incredibly sharp at f7.1-f8. F4.5-5.6 disappointed me in bright light, but it made up for it stopped down a few notches.

Here's a quick example at f7.1 that hasn't been USM'd or anything to enhance sharpness. Just as it was from the camera (minus a basic resize.) Check the little 'nipples' on the tire. I *really* like the 100-400L!

http://www.golilm.com/​images/irl/IMG0708.JPGexternal link

Adam

Post #4, Feb 07, 2005 19:41:16




LOG IN TO REPLY
aam1234
Goldmember
aam1234's Avatar
Joined May 2004
4,131 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

As Adam mentioned, the 100-400 is a disappointment when wide open, and you need that most of the time for such a lens.

Post #5, Feb 07, 2005 23:06:04 as a reply to Adam Hicks's post 3 hours earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
zach
Senior Member
zach's Avatar
Joined Jan 2005
665 posts
Colorado
[MORE/SHARE]

I'm getting ready to order my 100-400 and can't wait.

Adam, at what distance did you take that from? Super sharp!

Post #6, Feb 07, 2005 23:25:15


I'm a sucker for duck and goose pics!!
My Gear
My Galleryexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
blackviolet
Goldmember
blackviolet's Avatar
Joined Apr 2004
1,313 posts
sydney, au (now in singapore for a few years)
[MORE/SHARE]

RJSorensen wrote:
•The build of the Sigma . . . wiggled near the mount on the copy I used. But is generally robust.

i had this, and ultimately the internal screw came undone (as a result of heavy use of my 1dmk2 on the monopod, sigma said). the good news is they fixed it for free and had it back to me in a few short days. also they tightened all of them 'to spec' and said that it will definitely not come loose again (lots of loctite??).

since then i will definitely say it's a billion times more 'solid' feeling.

please, oh, please let the rumours regarding a 100-400 IS L replacement announcement be true - and may it not be push-me pull-you style (i could never get used to it :( )

Post #7, Feb 07, 2005 23:33:01


--
oblio
1dmkiii - 5dmkii -Leica M8/M6 - Mamiya 645AFDiii/zd
ModelMayhemexternal link | myexternal linkflickexternal linkr galleryexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
cc10d
Senior Member
cc10d's Avatar
Joined Jan 2004
804 posts
Oregon, USA
[MORE/SHARE]

and may it not be push-me pull-you style (i could never get used to it )
_______________
I did not think I would get used to it either, but now that I have used it for a while, It ain't that bad. Sometimes I think I prefer it. Zoom is quick and no wrenched wrist either. I don't think either is superior to the other (twist or push pull) the main thing is how much range vs. ease of use. Anyway I get along with the push pull fine now. FWIW

Post #8, Feb 08, 2005 03:53:18


cc

LOG IN TO REPLY
RJSorensen
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
RJSorensen's Avatar
Joined Sep 2004
1,706 posts
Near Tin Cup, Wyoming, USA
[MORE/SHARE]

My old Minolta zooms were of the push-pull type and I am quite tickled with it. It handles like a little Browning double barrel skeet gun . . . fast and accurate. I noticed this morning that as an added benefit, I have a lot more shots that are acceptable. My reject rate for out of focus, blurry and etc. et al., is far less. In a way it makes one more productive . . . my time seemed better spent.

Also my many thanks to those whom can and have commented on this thread.

Post #9, Feb 08, 2005 07:49:41


"With Some Practice . . . I Am Able to Believe Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast!"
5D, 20D, EF 50 f/1.4, EF 16-35 L, EF-S 17-85, EF 24-70 L, EF 100-400 L, 1.4 TC II, Tubes, 550 EX, 580 EX.

LOG IN TO REPLY
Adam ­ Hicks
Senior Member
Adam Hicks's Avatar
Joined Apr 2004
952 posts
Ft. Worth, TX
[MORE/SHARE]

Yeah you know I just can't imagine being able to find the zoom points between 100-400 as quickly with a twist zoom vs. the current push/pull. I know it's weird, and different from the rest of the lenses, but out at the track, when I need to zoom all the way in, I can do it in a fraction of a second, vs. twisting a ring to get from one end to the other. If they made the twist zoom fast enough to compare with the speed of the 100-400 it would be difficult to find points in between as easily, but if they made it slow, it would take too many twists to get from one end to the other. That's my concern and the reason I'm perfectly happy with the current design.

Adam

Post #10, Feb 08, 2005 07:56:01




LOG IN TO REPLY
Cadwell
Cream of the Crop
Cadwell's Avatar
Joined Jan 2004
7,333 posts
Hampshire, UK
[MORE/SHARE]

I don't really find the push-pull zoom a problem; in fact it works quite well. Swapping between lenses of different zoom types isn't an issue either... I can only thing of one occasion when I swapped from the 100-400 to a twist zoom lens and tried to pull the front off of it... :lol:

For me, the great advantage of the 100-400L is it's relatively light weight and compactness. It makes a great walkaround zoom for trackside.

Post #11, Feb 08, 2005 08:23:01 as a reply to Adam Hicks's post 27 minutes earlier.


Glenn
My Pictures: Motorsportexternal link/Canoe Poloexternal link/Other Stuffexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Jon
Moderator

Cocker Spaniel Mod

Jon's Avatar
Joined Jun 2004
68,238 posts
Bethesda, MD USA
[MORE/SHARE]

Coming from the old MF days when one-touch was best (focus and zoom without readjusting your hand), I think if you give it a chance, you're going to like it. It has the advantage that as the lens extends further out your hand supporting the lens goes with it too. Result - better support for the camera-lens combination.

Post #12, Feb 08, 2005 11:17:36


Jon
----------
Cocker Spaniels
Maryland and Virginia activities
Image Posting Rules and Image Posting FAQ
Report SPAM, Don't Answer It! (link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.
PAYPAL GIFT NO LONGER ALLOWED HERE

LOG IN TO REPLY
condyk
Africa's #1 Tour Guide
condyk's Avatar
Joined Mar 2005
20,852 posts
Birmingham, UK
[MORE/SHARE]

I'm wondering if this is a fair comparison? Maybe the 80-400 OS sigma would be better to compare with at the price point ... and given they both have OS/IS and both go to 400mm.

Of course, it's just sour grapes because I have a Bigma and can't afford the 100-400!

Post #13, Apr 27, 2005 17:51:14


http://photography-on-the.net .../showthread.php?t=1​203740

LOG IN TO REPLY
Adam ­ Hicks
Senior Member
Adam Hicks's Avatar
Joined Apr 2004
952 posts
Ft. Worth, TX
[MORE/SHARE]

How on earth did you find this thread :) It's from early Feb...

But welcome to the thread!

Post #14, Apr 27, 2005 17:54:51




LOG IN TO REPLY
condyk
Africa's #1 Tour Guide
condyk's Avatar
Joined Mar 2005
20,852 posts
Birmingham, UK
[MORE/SHARE]

I was being a good boy and checking out reviews/polls of wide(ish!) lenses rather than asking 'the same old questions' via the forum and there was my baby, OK, my big fat baby ... or even my very big fat heavy baby ... being beaten up by a much more expensive foe! Given the almost orgasmic review of the 80-400mm OS posted last year, also posted here-abouts, it seemed the logical comparison! Gawd ... I'm almost tempted to consider one myself: could swing it if I sold my two big Sigmas ... just kidding, erm, I think!!

Post #15, Apr 27, 2005 18:20:28


http://photography-on-the.net .../showthread.php?t=1​203740

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
29,445 views & 0 likes for this thread
Sigma 50-500 vs. Canon 100-400L IS . . .
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00097 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
885 guests, 592 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is Efstratios

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.