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 18 Aug 2012 (Saturday) 02:53
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

100-400 and alternatives for animals

 
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 33
Joined Jun 2008
     
Aug 18, 2012 11:50 |  #16

jimewall wrote in post #14874408 (external link)
One copy of each. I do not believe they got a good copy of the Sigma. Some of the older copies of 150-500 are not good, my guess was that is from one of them.

Even so, the Canon is a little sharper. IMO that example 150-500 example at digital-picture is not a good one.

sure, you can choose to believe that lens comparison site got a bad copy but plenty of people over the years have compared these lens, do a little googling and you will see the Canon almost always shows up sharper with better "IQ" or resolution. If you think that's bad check out a thread today comparing Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400 on FM. on second thought, don't look, if you're a sigma telephoto fan, it ain't too pretty




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
pyro1
Goldmember
Avatar
1,266 posts
Gallery: 88 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 662
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Meridian, MS
     
Aug 18, 2012 11:56 as a reply to  @ watt100's post |  #17

IMAGE: http://jefflhomanphotography.smugmug.com/Zoos/Memphis-Zoo/i-Nm8n344/1/X2/IMG4548-X2.jpg

Shot with the 100-400, @ 560mm, Kenko 1.4 pro300, 100 ISO, 1/40th, f/8, hand held. I want a 70-200 II, waiting for the right time, but I would imagine the IQ would be sweet with a good converter!

1DX MKIII, Twin 1DX, 5D mk III - EF 16-35 f/2.8L II USM - EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM - EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM II - EF 100-400 f/4.5 L IS USM - EF 100 f/2.8 L Macro IS USM - EF 85mm f/1.2 L II USM - Tam 24-70 f/2.8 Di VC - 580EXII - Einsteins & CyberSync System - Vagabond Mini -
My smugmug (external link) My Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Aug 18, 2012 14:33 |  #18

watt100 wrote in post #14874660 (external link)
sure, you can choose to believe that lens comparison site got a bad copy but plenty of people over the years have compared these lens, do a little googling and you will see the Canon almost always shows up sharper with better "IQ" or resolution. If you think that's bad check out a thread today comparing Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400 on FM. on second thought, don't look, if you're a sigma telephoto fan, it ain't too pretty

Thanks for the suggestion and I did do the web searching (and such) before I purchased. If you noticed (since you quoted me) I said it was, just not that much (based on the d-p site). There have also been plenty of posts where photographers have shown their Sigma to be a better copy than that of the current example at d-p.

By the way, I'm a fan of the best lens for the job (that you have or can afford). Based on the way you are wording your post to me, that might be hard for you to understand.

The Canon was more than I could have afforded (when I purchased). The Canon was 100mm shorter at the long end. The Canon overlapped 100mm on the short end with my Tamron 70-210mm f/2.8 (I've upgraded since then to the Canon, but still have the Tamron). The Canon has worse stabilization. The Canon seemed like it had better IQ (I still agree), but it did not seem that much better image quality (depending on the copy of the Sigma lens = which I also still agree with). The has a much physical better build. The Canon was physically smaller (easier to fit to bags).

I went with the Sigma for the extra length but mostly because of it was what I could afford. Now if I would switch to Canon, it would only be because of the last one (physical size). Because it is physically smaller I would probably carry it with me more, not because I would consider it an upgrade. It would be both an upgrade and a downgrade dependent on how you look at it.

I am happy with the Sigma, you can be happy with your Canon.

(Heck if I had the money) I'd much (much) rather be shooting with a Canon 500mm or 600mm f/4L IS anytime, compared to either of those the lenses we've been discussing.


I also tried to find the thread from today, but not real familiar with FM. It might help to post the section where it is located.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bill ­ Ragosta
Senior Member
Avatar
323 posts
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Pennsylvania
     
Aug 18, 2012 14:40 |  #19

watt100 wrote in post #14874660 (external link)
sure, you can choose to believe that lens comparison site got a bad copy but plenty of people over the years have compared these lens, do a little googling and you will see the Canon almost always shows up sharper with better "IQ" or resolution. If you think that's bad check out a thread today comparing Sigma 150-500 vs Canon 100-400 on FM. on second thought, don't look, if you're a sigma telephoto fan, it ain't too pretty

I have the Siggy now and I'm seriously considering trading it for a 100-400 or selling the Bigmos outright to finance the purchase of the Canon. I looked over on FM quickly but didn't see the thread you allude to, can you point me in the right direction? Is it on the Canon SLR forum?


Canon 60D, Canon 30D with grip, EF 70-300 IS USM, Tokina AT-X Pro 100 f/2.8 macro, EF 100-400 1:4.5-5.6L, EF-S 15-85 IS USM, Sigma 50 f2.8 macro EX, 430 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott ­ M
Goldmember
3,300 posts
Gallery: 84 photos
Likes: 388
Joined May 2008
Location: Michigan
     
Aug 18, 2012 17:13 |  #20

I cannot comment on the Sigmas as I've never tried them, but I am delighted with the results from the 100-400L. It's sharp wide open and at 400mm, and the AF performance is quite good. The lens is lighter and smaller than the Sigmas, too.

The IS performance is not great, though, as it's an older version. You will need to keep your shutter speed up when shooting handheld. I try to maintain 1/1000sec when shooting with a crop body. I can go slower, but this my starting point and I only shoot slower when I run out of aperture and ISO.


Photo Gallery (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bill ­ Ragosta
Senior Member
Avatar
323 posts
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Pennsylvania
     
Aug 18, 2012 18:03 |  #21

Bill Ragosta wrote in post #14875101 (external link)
I have the Siggy now and I'm seriously considering trading it for a 100-400 or selling the Bigmos outright to finance the purchase of the Canon. I looked over on FM quickly but didn't see the thread you allude to, can you point me in the right direction? Is it on the Canon SLR forum?

OK, I found it, never mind. Looks like the Sigma took some lumps big time early on in that thread but I'm guessing that most of the posters had never used it. Later, a few guys posted some nice images with the 150-500 and especially with the 50-500. Although I'm mostly happy with my 150-500, I still think I'm going to look at trading for the 100-400 or selling the Sigma outright to buy the Canon. I'm mostly a wildlife photographer and find myself shooting early and late in the day most of the time. The fact that the Canon is sharper wide open is a big deal to me, even if I will lose 100mm on the long end.


Canon 60D, Canon 30D with grip, EF 70-300 IS USM, Tokina AT-X Pro 100 f/2.8 macro, EF 100-400 1:4.5-5.6L, EF-S 15-85 IS USM, Sigma 50 f2.8 macro EX, 430 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,385 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 3375
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Aug 18, 2012 19:27 |  #22

here's some other comparisons between the 150-500OS, 100-400L, and 50-500OS and 100-400L
http://www.juzaphoto.c​om/article.php?l=en&ar​ticle=54 (external link)
http://www.juzaphoto.c​om/article.php?l=en&ar​ticle=50 (external link)
it's not as drastic as the digital picture makes it seem, i'm usually stopped down to f8 though with mine...there's a loss of contrast at 500mm

how serious are you about animals though? being on a FF camera you're probably going to be a little short at 400mm even...


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
39,675 posts
Gallery: 116 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 8078
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Aug 19, 2012 06:41 |  #23

The 50-500OS, wide open, works very nicely on FF, quite good on APS-H, and starts to show its optical flaws on the7D/60D, etc. and you have to stop it down a bit with those cameras.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,533 posts
Likes: 28
Joined Aug 2008
     
Aug 19, 2012 06:49 |  #24

I would consider the excellent 400mm 5.6. Also, I think you will find this article very interesting... http://www.luminous-landscape.com …enses/forgotten​-400.shtml (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 33
Joined Jun 2008
     
Aug 19, 2012 07:28 |  #25

nightcat wrote in post #14877313 (external link)
I would consider the excellent 400mm 5.6. Also, I think you will find this article very interesting... http://www.luminous-landscape.com …enses/forgotten​-400.shtml (external link)

sure the 400mm prime is slightly sharper and when I had one I got some nice images but being restricted to 400mm is, ...... restricting! I found the zoom far more versatile. That's probably why Canon sells a lot more 100-400 zooms than 400 primes




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 33
Joined Jun 2008
     
Aug 19, 2012 07:36 |  #26

pyro1 wrote in post #14874673 (external link)
Shot with the 100-400, @ 560mm, Kenko 1.4 pro300, 100 ISO, 1/40th, f/8, hand held. I want a 70-200 II, waiting for the right time, but I would imagine the IQ would be sweet with a good converter!

actually this looks like a good reason for not getting a kenko extender,
it seems teleconverters /extenders degrade the image quality too much
I can crop a pic (considerably) and it turns out pretty good


it's a different lion and different lighting conditions, etc. but ...
XSi (450D)
100-400
f5.6
400mm
(cropped 50%)




IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7131/7008882719_46428ebd96_b.jpg



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Fodowsky
Senior Member
Avatar
591 posts
Joined May 2007
Location: Dallas, TX
     
Aug 19, 2012 07:37 |  #27

I have the 2X III and use it with my 70-200 II. I am very happy with the results. I also owned the 100-400 and the difference (to me) was negligible.


Gear and Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
howiewu
Senior Member
Avatar
629 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Feb 2011
     
Aug 19, 2012 08:08 |  #28

Just get the 100-400, you will not regret it.


5DII, 70D
17-40mm f/4 USM L, 24-70mm f/4 IS USM L, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS USM L, 24mm f/3.5 TS-E L, 35mm f/2, 50mm f/1.4 USM, 100mm f/2.8 IS USM L, 300mm f/2.8 IS USM II L, 430 EX II, 270 EX II, 1.4x TC III, 2x TC III, Kenko Pro 300 1.4x TC
Home Page: http://www.travelerath​ome.com (external link), Blog: http://travelerathome.​wordpress.com (external link)

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

6,340 views & 0 likes for this thread
100-400 and alternatives for animals
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 robert7111a
653 guests, 253 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.