Looking for my second lens, 100-400 or Sig 50-500?

Ok, I have my 5DmkII & my 24-105 L, now I want some reach for wildlife, sports & general outdoor photos. I was really heading to the 100-400 L, until I read about the Sig 50-500.

Please help me make the right decision.

Thanks, Jeff

I currently own both the Sigma 50-500 OS as well as the Canon 100-400L. I prefer the Canon over the Sigma because it is lighter and the push/pull zoom I have found invaluable for tracking birds in flight. I love the zoom range of the Sigma and the close focus capabilities. If I did not shoot alot of birds in flight it would be a toss up as they both have excellent IQ and very similar image stabilizer performance. When I first purchased the 50-500 OS it hunted excessively and developed the famous Sigma HSM "jackhammering". Sigma was able to fix it and I used it extensively for 8 months with no more problems before purchasing the 100-400L this past summer which pretty much relegated the 50-500 OS to a backup roll and very shortly I'll probably sell it along with my remaining Sigmas. If I were going on a Safari or into a situation where I wanted the greater focal range then the 50-500 OS would be my choice but for my everyday use lens the 100-400L wins out.

^^you should try just grabbing the end of the sigma and using it as a 'push pull' type lens...works out well with my 150-500OS

Thanks for your info, I'm really leaning towards the Canon, I have read about a lot of the Sigmas having to be sent back soon after purchase, that would really miff me after buying it new. Don't get me wrong, love the focal range, but I feel like spending 1600.00 on a lens, it should be ready to go without need for adjustment. How common is the Sigma problems?

I guess the 70-200mm are not long enough for what you're looking to do? You have some amazing options in that focal range. The 100-400mm L is a great lens, but it uses that weird perverted pump action to zoom which also sucks in dust over time. Also, that lens is a fairly old design. Maybe look at the 70-200mm f4L IS and get a 1.4x III TC for more reach? I never really looked into the Sigma 50-500 specifically, but those Sigmas scare me with all their AF issues. Also, 50-500mm is a huge focal range. I would think there would be some compromises made to get that kind of range.

Speaking of which, have you considered the 150-500 OS?

DreDaze wrote in post #14069157
^^you should try just grabbing the end of the sigma and using it as a 'push pull' type lens...works out well with my 150-500OS

That technique works well with the 150-500 OS but not the 50-500 OS. I shot with a 150-500 OS for a year before buying the 50-500 OS and I found myself zooming by grabbing just behind the lens hood and pushing and pulling (how good this is on the internal compnents of the lens remains to be seen). When I bought my 50-500 OS I found the zoom feature to be much stiffer and it does not work to push and pull zoom as I think its extended zoom range has a steeper cam. The 100-400L was designed to push/pull zoom so I'll just stick with it. The 150-500 OS was a good lens but the zoom range was to restrictive for my everyday carry lens.

I am a newbie. When I bought my 60D it came with the 18-200. I have since picked up the 10-22 and the 100-400L. I find for the shooting that I do, I use the 100-400 and 10-22 most of the time. The 18-200 is not wide enough and way to short.

From what I have read, the Sigma lens are great if you get a good copy (that applies to the 100-400 as well). But for me, they are a little to big and to heavy for the gain of an extra 100mm. I wouldn't want to tote one of those around all day.

DreDaze wrote in post #14069157
^^you should try just grabbing the end of the sigma and using it as a 'push pull' type lens...works out well with my 150-500OS

That's what i did, for the short time i had the 150-500.

DreDaze wrote in post #14069157
^^you should try just grabbing the end of the sigma and using it as a 'push pull' type lens...works out well with my 150-500OS

that is how i use mine as well

Used a Sigma 150-500 for three years for BIF without any issues, now replaced with a Sigma 120-300 f2.8 and 1.4 and 2X TC's, the Canon is the lighter lens, but if buying again I would get another Sigma.

pyro1 wrote in post #14068773
Ok, I have my 5DmkII & my 24-105 L, now I want some reach for wildlife, sports & general outdoor photos. I was really heading to the 100-400 L, until I read about the Sig 50-500.

Please help me make the right decision.

Thanks, Jeff

For sports, wildlife and general outdoor photos I use the Canon 100-400. I was also intrigued by the Sigma 50-500 but eventually got the Canon because of the reviews and comparisons of image quality, AF, etc.

I've got a Canon 100-400 and a Sigma 150-500 OS and to be honest I've been using the Sigma more than the Canon. I adjusted the focus slightly on my 7D and it's as sharp as a tack on Jpeg's SOOC. It's as sharp on my 5D2 without any adjustment and the idea was to use the Sigma on the 5D2 and the Canon on my 7D for this years airshows, but I've been practicing on birds and wildlife to get used to it. If push came to shove and I had to choose between the Canon and the Sigma right now I think I'd keep the Sigma. The Sigma takes the edge on OS/IS and range and they are about the same on IQ.