Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 28 Feb 2005 (Monday) 00:36
Search threadPrev/next
POLL: "Vote for your Favorite Wildlife Zoom lens"
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6[color=red]L[/color] IS
1249
47.7%
EF 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 IS USM
116
4.4%
EF 70-300mm f/5.6[color=green]DO[/color] IS
77
2.9%
EF 70-200mm f/2.8[color=red]L[/color] IS (or non IS)
402
15.3%
EF 70-200mm f/4[color=red]L[/color] IS (or non IS)
246
9.4%
Sigma 300-800mm f/5.6 EX HSM
65
2.5%
Sigma 50-500mm f/4.5-6.3 EX HSM
165
6.3%
Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX HSM
71
2.7%
Sigma 100-300mm f/4 EX HSM
33
1.3%
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX HSM
47
1.8%
Sigma 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 EX OS
28
1.1%
Tamron SP AF200-500MM F/5-6.3 Di LD
37
1.4%
SIGMA 120-400mm f/4.5-5.6 DG OS HSM
10
0.4%
SIGMA 150-500mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM
64
2.4%
SIGMA 50-500mm F4.5-6.3 EX DG OS HSM
9
0.3%

2347 voters, 2619 votes given (any choice choices can be voted per member)). VOTING IS FOR MEMBERS ONLY.
BROWSE ALL POLLS
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

-=Top 10=- Recommended wildlife Zooms

 
this thread is locked
BuzzyB
Junior Member
23 posts
Joined Mar 2008
     
Apr 25, 2008 14:52 |  #76

I have a 70-300IS and a 100-400IS. At first I thought the 70-300 was actually sharper. I had to run some tests on a tripod to cinvince myself otherwise....then ....I had my 100-400 calibrated. wow. What a difference once calibrated.

Buddy




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
CyberDyneSystems
THREAD ­ STARTER
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
49,820 posts
Gallery: 161 photos
Likes: 6519
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Dec 01, 2008 20:26 |  #77

No one reminded me... ;)

New SIGMA Super-Tele zooms added! :)


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,729 posts
Gallery: 146 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3852
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Jan 11, 2009 12:04 |  #78

The Sigma 150-500mm was awful. I'd always used nothing but Canon glass, but when Sigma came out with this they had me hooked - who wouldn't want a light 500mm with Vibration Reduction that they could handhold. And for under $1000 ! It seemed too good to be true. Well, it WAS too good to be true. I got it and used it right away. Took it to Yellowstone, in fact. I shot a few thousand images in the first week and a half and then when I had a chance to really sit down and examine them on my good monitor, I was displeased with the image quality. It simply didn't give me the kind of clarity and contrast I've been used to with the Canon L-glass. I lost feather detail in birds and hair detail in mammals. And everything had this very faint orangish/yellowish cast to it that I couldn't get rid of by changing white balance. Just awful! I sent it back to B&H just in time to get a full refund. This was my only Sigma purchase, ever, and I can't imagine ever trying a Sigma again. Disappointing. I wish Canon would make a 150-500 IS like this - it would be well worth 3 times the price.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
condyk
Africa's #1 Tour Guide
Avatar
20,886 posts
Likes: 20
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Birmingham, UK
     
Jan 11, 2009 12:11 |  #79

Yeah, I felt the same about the 2x 100-400 L's that I owned. I liked the Sigma and still think It's a great lens for the money. Did you have a cheap filter on it?

Bit weird you couldn't get rid of a colour cast! I assume you shot RAW?


https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1203740

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,121 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2384
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Jan 11, 2009 12:53 |  #80

this thing is back from the dead...the 70-300IS is still missing from the list...also how are there so many votes for any of the 70-200's...there's no way 200mm is long enough to be a good wildlife zoom...i'm not talking zoo shots


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CountryBoy
"Tired of Goldmember label"
Avatar
5,168 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Okie
     
Jan 11, 2009 16:31 |  #81

DreDaze wrote in post #7052948 (external link)
this thing is back from the dead...the 70-300IS is still missing from the list...also how are there so many votes for any of the 70-200's...there's no way 200mm is long enough to be a good wildlife zoom...i'm not talking zoo shots

I agree, the 70 -200's are just to short. I find 420mm lacking at times.


Hi

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
_aravena
isn't this answer a stickie yet?
Avatar
12,450 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Feb 2007
Location: Back in the 757
     
Jan 11, 2009 16:34 |  #82

Good for close stuff maybe. I don't think people consider that. I love my 70-200 and it's gotten me great bird shots. But if I go out into a park or something , it generally falls too short.

I'm still debating the 150-500 and 100-400L. I guess I'll just have to rent the Sigma since I've rented the Canon. Man I loved that L. But I'm curious about updated OS systems.


Last Shot Photography
My Site (external link) ~ Gear List ~ Bag Reviews

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bhowdy
Senior Member
Avatar
694 posts
Gallery: 35 photos
Likes: 524
Joined Jan 2008
Location: east Tennessee
     
Jan 11, 2009 18:47 as a reply to  @ _aravena's post |  #83

Since this is now the "Phoenix" thread I will add my humble opinion as well.

I own the Canon 70-200 f4L IS and it is just too short for wildlife in my opinion. I also own the Canon 100-400L IS, this was my first long lens. I used it on an XTi with a teleconvertor at times (pins taped) with moderate success. The images were always sharper without the tc. I moved up to the 40D and it was manual focus or nothing for me when using the tc. Seemed like the 40D did not like this lens and a tc, but does great without it.

I have taken many very good to excellent photos, including birds in flight with my 100-400. It is easy for me to carry and hand hold. I find that adding the battery grip to the XTi and the 40D helped the balance when using the 100-400.

I have used a "Bigma" and while it does have more reach than the 100-400 ...... please don't make me go back there! I was not pleased with the results.

Would I purchase the Canon 100-400 again ... yes, would I buy a new one if Canon updates the lens (i.e. newer IS, etc) ..... yes. This is a very nice lens, when used in it's comfort zone. No it does not do well in low light, but neither would lens such as the Canon 70-300.

Oh and I did solve my need for "more reach." I recently purchased a Canon 500mm f4L IS and added a Canon 1D Mark III. Wow what a great wildlife, especially BIF combination!


Bob
East Tennessee, USA

My Full Gear List - My Photo Galleries (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shaftmaster
Goldmember
Avatar
1,429 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2008
Location: above 5000 feet
     
Feb 27, 2009 20:55 |  #84

At the risk of instant ridicule, can I ask why the EF 70-300 IS and EF-S 55-250 IS haven't been added to this poll? Also, would anyone consider using the Tokina 80-400 AT-X D for wildlife?


Paul

Gear -- Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nistelrooydude
Goldmember
Avatar
1,495 posts
Joined Feb 2008
     
Feb 27, 2009 21:08 as a reply to  @ shaftmaster's post |  #85

70-200 f/2.8L IS with a 1.4x T-Con. Not the range of the 100-400L, but superior aperture and optics.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,729 posts
Gallery: 146 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3852
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Feb 28, 2009 15:39 |  #86

I think it's hard to argue that the very, very best zoom lenses for wildlife photography are not Canon lenses at all, but the Nikon 200-400 f4 and the Sigma 200-500 f2.8. I don't own either one, but I've used them both and they obviously have the little Canon 100-400 beat hands down.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
H20boy
Senior Member
Avatar
611 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Ft. Worth, TX - USA
     
Apr 14, 2009 15:42 |  #87

I found this poll, after missing it for so long, but I also think the 70-200, even with the 1.4x is going to be a little short, unless you're in a small zoo area. If you're going 'open' game, then 300 is the minimum you'll need, and even that will come up short. I've voted for the Siggy 120-300/2.8 w. the 1.4x if necessary. I've used this combo with good success in sporting situations, but have noticed it is a bit warmer in color than the Canon 70-200s. This necessarily isn't bad, and I try to do a custom white balance before shooting with it, even in the daytime. I've got a zoo trip planned in the next few weeks, so we'll see how it works out there.


Matt l My Galleries (external link)
5d2 l 1d3 l 24-70/2.8 l Σ 50/1.4 l 70-200/2.8 IS l Σ 120-300/2.8 l 135/2 l 15/2.8 FE l Tam 90mac

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
StarBlazer
Member
83 posts
Joined May 2011
Location: Sardinia, Italy
     
Jul 17, 2012 13:10 as a reply to  @ H20boy's post |  #88

Since 2009 the choice has changed a fair amount. Sig 120-300 OS, Ef 70-300L etc. Is there a chance the legendary 100-400 could lose it's crown?


EOS 7D | EOS 350d | EF-S 10-22mm | EF-S 18-135mm IS | EF 70-210 f/4 | Σ 120-300 f/2.8 OS | EF 50mm f/1.8 MKI | EF 100mm Macro f/2.8L IS | Σ 2x APO EX DG TC |
Celestron C9.25 | Vixen Sphinx SXD

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sambarino
Senior Member
549 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Feb 2011
     
Jul 17, 2012 16:39 |  #89

StarBlazer wrote in post #14730083 (external link)
Since 2009 the choice has changed a fair amount. Sig 120-300 OS, Ef 70-300L etc. Is there a chance the legendary 100-400 could lose it's crown?

I just spent months choosing a long lens. I chose the 100-400L. For me, 300mm was just too short. Sigma had the only real competition for the 100-400L. The 120-400 is reviewed by many to be too soft at 400 & f/5.6. The XX(X)-500 Sigmas are just HUGE, with (reviewed) IQ problems at the long end. The copy of the 100-400L I got is very sharp at 400mm & f/5.6. I am happy with my decision. I do wish the IS were better; I get 1-2 stops of assistance at 400mm. Since I generally shoot this lens in good light, the shutter speed is 1/800 or better so I just shut off the IS. The lens focuses faster, and better, without it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,121 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2384
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Jul 17, 2012 17:05 |  #90

StarBlazer wrote in post #14730083 (external link)
Since 2009 the choice has changed a fair amount. Sig 120-300 OS, Ef 70-300L etc. Is there a chance the legendary 100-400 could lose it's crown?

i think once that 200-400f4 with built in 1.4TC will take the crown...although it's probably coming in at a pretty penny...

also maybe the 200-500f2.8, which didn't make the list...

either way the 100-400L would still win a poll like this, because people will vote for what they have, and most aren't going to be shelling out the big money for the 200-400mm


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

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

94,086 views & 4 likes for this thread
-=Top 10=- Recommended wildlife Zooms
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is StevePB
650 guests, 244 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.