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
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
Thread started 13 Aug 2012 (Monday) 15:08
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Telephoto help

 
tomj
Senior Member
706 posts
Likes: 61
Joined May 2010
     
Aug 14, 2012 13:36 as a reply to  @ post 14855216 |  #46

Regarding the image quality comparisons of lenses, keep in mind that another important factor, especially for BIF, is focusing performance. The Canon's outperform the Sigma here.

I had my 150-500 checked by Sigma because I was frequently experiencing inconsistent and and inaccurate focusing. I spoke with the tech working on it, who told the lens was performing "within spec" (whatever that is), and that focusing could be expected to be "hit or miss" (his words) because it's a f/6.3 lens, out of Canon's specs for autofocus.


Flickr (external link)
Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bill ­ Ragosta
Senior Member
Avatar
323 posts
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Pennsylvania
     
Aug 14, 2012 13:43 |  #47

tomj wrote in post #14857834 (external link)
Regarding the image quality comparisons of lenses, keep in mind that another important factor, especially for BIF, is focusing performance. The Canon's outperform the Sigma here.

I had my 150-500 checked by Sigma because I was frequently experiencing inconsistent and and inaccurate focusing. I spoke with the tech working on it, who told the lens was performing "within spec" (whatever that is), and that focusing could be expected to be "hit or miss" (his words) because it's a f/6.3 lens, out of Canon's specs for autofocus.

That's interesting. Frankly, I've been mostly happy about the overall IQ of my 150-500 but I've really been quite happy with the focusing for BIF under most circumstances. It's good to know that I can expect at least as good, if not better, if I purchase the Canon.


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
Lichter21c
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,385 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 338
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Kenosha, WI
     
Aug 14, 2012 14:20 |  #48

thank you for the links. they really put things into perspective. the more I think about it the more I'm thinking of just bringing the 100-400 and maybe renting a 2x III for stationary.( like someone has mentioned) I would really like to get the sigma 150-500 but the more opinions I get the more I'm starting to think that the extra little bit wont be worth it. and if I do end up getting the 150-500 I will have the 100-400 with me anyway.

I really appreciate everyones help and would love to hear more peoples opinions. I have a L-O-N-G time to go before I have to make a decision.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
h14nha
Goldmember
Avatar
2,095 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 179
Joined Nov 2008
Location: South Wales, UK
     
Aug 15, 2012 13:27 |  #49

What about a used Sigma 300 F2.8 prime. They are a bargain second hand and with a 2 X TC is probably the cheapest/best way to 600mm.
I shoot mine almost exclusive wide open, and find sometimes it's too long even. It focuses fast as a bare lens, ( much faster than the 100-400 ) and has good to great IQ. Here's a shot for you to decide for yourself.

IMAGE: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/images/hostedphotos_lq/2012/08/3/LQ_610522.jpg
Image hosted by forum (610522) © h14nha [SHARE LINK]
THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff.

Ian
There's no fool like an old skool fool :D
myflickr (external link)
My Gear - 7d, / 16-35mm F4 / 70-200 2.8 II / 100-400 / 300mm 2.8 / 500/4 :D XT-1 Graphite 18/35/56

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lichter21c
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,385 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 338
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Kenosha, WI
     
Aug 15, 2012 14:16 |  #50

h14nha wrote in post #14862243 (external link)
What about a used Sigma 300 F2.8 prime. They are a bargain second hand and with a 2 X TC is probably the cheapest/best way to 600mm.
I shoot mine almost exclusive wide open, and find sometimes it's too long even. It focuses fast as a bare lens, ( much faster than the 100-400 ) and has good to great IQ. Here's a shot for you to decide for yourself.

Unless you are talking about a different one than I am seeing. I really cannot afford that, I mean for that kind of money I would buy a canon. Thank you for your input though and thats a fantastic shot!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,331 posts
Likes: 146
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Aug 15, 2012 14:22 |  #51

Travelling and hiking, it's hard to beat the 100-400 IS. And the 7D is an ideal companion for it. (I certainly wouldn't give it up for a full frame camera with that lens!)

Any prime lens of equal or longer focal length, you'd likely want a tripod or at least a monopod.... and the big, fast super teles are more of a chore to haul around, too.

You might be best served by learning some stalking skills, investing in some camo clothing and/or using some sort of attractant to get the birds to come to you.... and just using the lens you already have.

The most hand-holdable alternatives are....

Canon 300/4 IS with a 1.4X teleconverter. Though it's a good combo, this would not give you significantly more reach or any faster aperture. It might be less convenient, too, than a zoom. Only two focal lengths: 300mm, plus 420mm when combined with the TC.

Canon 400/5.6. One focal length. Can't use with a TC, unless you give up autofocus or use some work-around, but then will still be limited by slower focus in good light. Nice and sharp, but no IS, so harder to handhold. You'll need to keep to 1/640 or faster shutter speeds.

Sigma 150-500 OS... I'd like to try this lens sometime... I'm not a fan of the push-pull zoom design of the Canon 100-400... but the image quality doesn't appear as good. Other comparisons I've seen (aside from that link above) have been more favorable. It would give you 100mm more reach, but is larger and heavier. Technically it's not usable with a teleconverter, either.

Sigma 120-300/2.8 OS with a 1.4X and/or 2X teleconverter. This is a whole lot more expensive (I'm guessing it's out of the budget)... and bigger, heavier. Quite versatile, though a monopod at least might be useful.

Sigma 120-400 OS.... no gain compared to the 100-400. It's a lot less expensive, about the same size and some think Sigma's OS is at least as good, maybe even better than the IS on some of Canon's lenses (for example, the 100-400 has an older, less capable version of IS).

There simply is no such thing as a "long enough" lens when shooting birds. If you have a 300mm, you'll want 400mm. If you have 400mm, there will be times you'll wish it were a 500mm. Got a 500mm? Well time to start saving up for a 600mm or 800mm!

And, with each increase in focal length, it's harder to get a steady shot, the more you might want to use some sort of support... Plus you are shooting through more atmosphere, which can have negative effects on image quality at times.

So, you might want to just use what you've got and work to get closer to your subjects. Some will always be just out of reach... maybe those are the times to put down the camera and just enjoy the moment.


Alan Myers (external link) "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
5DII, 7DII, 7D, M5 & others. 10-22mm, Meike 12/2.8,Tokina 12-24/4, 20/2.8, EF-M 22/2, TS 24/3.5L, 24-70/2.8L, 28/1.8, 28-135 IS (x2), TS 45/2.8, 50/1.4, Sigma 56/1.4, Tamron 60/2.0, 70-200/4L IS, 70-200/2.8 IS, 85/1.8, Tamron 90/2.5, 100/2.8 USM, 100-400L II, 135/2L, 180/3.5L, 300/4L IS, 300/2.8L IS, 500/4L IS, EF 1.4X II, EF 2X II. Flashes, strobes & various access. - FLICKR (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
h14nha
Goldmember
Avatar
2,095 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 179
Joined Nov 2008
Location: South Wales, UK
     
Aug 15, 2012 18:47 |  #52

Lichter21c wrote in post #14862431 (external link)
Unless you are talking about a different one than I am seeing. I really cannot afford that, I mean for that kind of money I would buy a canon. Thank you for your input though and thats a fantastic shot!

Thanks, btw I paid much less than the cost of a 100-400 for my Sigma ;)


Ian
There's no fool like an old skool fool :D
myflickr (external link)
My Gear - 7d, / 16-35mm F4 / 70-200 2.8 II / 100-400 / 300mm 2.8 / 500/4 :D XT-1 Graphite 18/35/56

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lichter21c
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,385 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 338
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Kenosha, WI
     
Aug 15, 2012 18:57 |  #53

h14nha wrote in post #14863468 (external link)
Thanks, btw I paid much less than the cost of a 100-400 for my Sigma ;)

without a doubt I am sure it's a nice lens and worth every penny. I just cant justify spending that kind of money right now. I am looking in the ball park of 1000 or less

amfoto1, you make very good points. I think the 300 with the TC is out. Im in between the 400 5.6 and the sigma 150-500. I would like to try the 400 5.6 for BIF and possibly quickly attaching and detaching a 2x TC for stationary. Although that would be a little bit above my 1K limit I put myself at.

I personally really like the OS on sigma also though. I do feel it is on par with canons. it seems to be as equal as the 70-200 2.8 IS II

I may be leaning towards the sigma more just for cost alone. the sharpness may not be equal to canon but I would really like the extra 100 (or 160 on my body) plus the OS capability.

All of you have been a tremendous help!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Aug 16, 2012 04:30 |  #54

Lichter21c wrote in post #14863505 (external link)
I would like to try the 400 5.6 for BIF and possibly quickly attaching and detaching a 2x TC for stationary.

If you stick a 2x TC on a 400 f5.6 you'll regret it. An 800mm f11 lens is going to be a real pig to focus (no AF) and you'll need a small thermonuclear device to get enough light for a decent shutter speed.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lichter21c
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,385 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 338
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Kenosha, WI
     
Aug 16, 2012 14:31 |  #55

hollis_f wrote in post #14865038 (external link)
If you stick a 2x TC on a 400 f5.6 you'll regret it. An 800mm f11 lens is going to be a real pig to focus (no AF) and you'll need a small thermonuclear device to get enough light for a decent shutter speed.

1st, I love the vocabulary. thats hilarious.

2 I agree with you. maybe I can try a 1.4 which will bring it to F/8? what do you think about that?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Laramie
Still livin' the cowboylife
Avatar
3,220 posts
Joined Nov 2006
Location: Inland Empire, California
     
Aug 16, 2012 14:34 |  #56

Lichter21c wrote in post #14867071 (external link)
1st, I love the vocabulary. thats hilarious.

2 I agree with you. maybe I can try a 1.4 which will bring it to F/8? what do you think about that?

Grated I was using a Tamron 1.4x, but I was never overly impressed with the results with my 400 5.6. But with a higher quality extender, you might have better luck, I'm sure there are a few threads on this combo.


5DIII | 40D | 17-40 f4L | Tamron 28-75 2.8 | 50 1.4 | 70-200 2.8L | Oly Zuiko 50 macro | Tamron 1.4x

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lichter21c
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,385 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 338
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Kenosha, WI
     
Aug 16, 2012 17:08 as a reply to  @ Laramie's post |  #57

Would anyone recommend the kenko 1.4? It says AF works with the 100-400 and the 400 5.6?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Aug 16, 2012 17:59 |  #58

Lichter21c wrote in post #14867677 (external link)
Would anyone recommend the kenko 1.4? It says AF works with the 100-400 and the 400 5.6?

Only if your definition of 'works' is 'tries to do what it's supposed to, but normally fails unless you have a static subject and very good light'.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bill ­ Ragosta
Senior Member
Avatar
323 posts
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Pennsylvania
     
Aug 16, 2012 18:05 |  #59

Lichter21c wrote in post #14867677 (external link)
Would anyone recommend the kenko 1.4? It says AF works with the 100-400 and the 400 5.6?

I've got the Kenko 1.4 that I occasionally use with my Sigma 150-500. As Hollis said, it sometimes works and often doesn't work very well but it's fine with manual focus and the IQ is surprisingly good with that combo. Obviously, manual focus typically isn't going to work very well with eagles in flight but there will be times that it would work for you on your trip I'd think.


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
tomj
Senior Member
706 posts
Likes: 61
Joined May 2010
     
Aug 16, 2012 18:06 as a reply to  @ tomj's post |  #60

"Would anyone recommend the kenko 1.4? It says AF works with the 100-400 and the 400 5.6?"

I think you'd be taking a really good lens and making it mediocre.


Flickr (external link)
Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

11,838 views & 0 likes for this thread, 24 members have posted to it.
Telephoto help
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

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

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 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such!
2784 guests, 157 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, 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.