Sigma 120-300 sports + TC's VS Tamron 150-600?

Hi everyone,
I'm looking at purchasing a long zoom for a possible safari trip later in the year and both of these have me interested.
I know the Sigma is the better lens but its a little short so it would need the sigma 1.4 or 2x TC's. I have seen some people here getting fantastic results with this combo.

Has anyone had the chance to compare the sigma when using either of the TC's against the Tamron for IQ and AF performance?

Which would you choose?

The Tamron based on weight alone. The Sigma plus an extender is almost twice the weight of the Tamron. I have neither but would really love to have the Sigma and f/2.8 for sports, not for travel.

A friend of mine went on a safari trip last summer and had many photos from very close range. A big lens plus a short/wide lens plus one or maybe two bodies is a lot of weight, especially if one of those lenses is the Sigma 120-300mm.

I'm still on the fence about taking my 400 2.8 IS, the reason I'm leaning towards not is because its a bit too large and heavy for the carry on, add a bag and it basically takes the whole lot up.

With the Sigma I'm not too concerned about the weight as its a lot more flexible than the 400 size and weight wise that I'll find a way to make it work, even if that means wearing some deep pocket pants

I'd still perfer the sigma with 1.4 and 2x

IQ will be similiar and the benefit is low light you can drop down to F4 and/or 2.8 and sometimes that is invaluable.

I've had to decide three times what to take that will allow me to take my gear in the cabin on flights. If you are a good technical photographer I think you can get by very nicely with the 150 or 50 to 500mm Sigmas. If you have a good copy and you don't bump them around too much, they will capture the images you want of wildlife, especially if you use a APS-C camera like the 7D.

The hard thing is the weight. Lufthansa and many others are now making you weigh in your carryon, regardless of whether it is the right size. When I went to South Africa last year I had to convince the checkin people to let me board with my gear at Orlando and again at Frankfort. Strangely I had no problem on the return flights. This January I went to India to wildlife parks and again had to be very insistent that I would not check my camera gear at every checkin on the way, but no problem returning. Go figure.

I just bought the 120-300mm OS Sport and so far I love it. I also have the 50-500 OS and it did very well for me in India, but I also took a Canon 400mm DO and TCs for both lenses as the Canon TCs will not fit the Bigmos properly. The 120-300 is heavy. Specs say right at 7 pounds but one test site says 7.5. It does take TCs, including the Canon models. I think it is likely more durable than the 50-500 which can be fragile. Check out the lens archive thread--lots of posted images, many with TCs. Of the Tamron, I can't say.

Aus.Morgo wrote in post #16744192
Hi everyone,
I'm looking at purchasing a long zoom for a possible safari trip later in the year and both of these have me interested.
I know the Sigma is the better lens but its a little short so it would need the sigma 1.4 or 2x TC's. I have seen some people here getting fantastic results with this combo.

Has anyone had the chance to compare the sigma when using either of the TC's against the Tamron for IQ and AF performance?

Which would you choose?

Heya,

Safari is generally fairly bright, as they don't want to be out in the dark. Right? Usually lots of dangerous critters. And you're out in the raw weather.

Why not just roll the Canon 100-400L?

The Tamron would be a good contender. It's relatively inexpensive, and it has been producing really great images. Serious focal length and not expensive for that length. Yea, it's not fast. But safari isn't that fast, most animals are just slumming around, it's too hot to be running all day. Even then, a running big animal is not too fast for the Tamron. People are doing birds in flight with the thing. I think you can handle a big cat or `lope. It's also packing some weather sealing and vibration control. It's also much lighter than other big telephotos, making it easier to hold all day unless you mono-pod it. On safair, how often do you get to use a tripod/monopod from the truck with the other people? Lighter really comes in handy to keep you frosty towards the end of the day, instead of elbows shaking and triceps burning.

If you have tons of time on this safari, by all means, take serious F2.8 telephotos. But the question is, won't you likely be stopping them down anyways in that sun?

And I do understand you're looking at this from a travel perspective, since it's hard to take some lenses with you on flights. It's why I immediately thought of the 100-400L and Tamron, or even the Sigma 50-500, as they are lighter, travel easier, and inexpensive for their focal lengths.

Very best,

Thanks for the replies.

I had thought of the 100-400 but I'm not sure about that one. I had heard a lot of negative things early on that put me off it.
I'm thinking I might rent, borrow or buy the 150-600 and see how I like it to start with though I did find a well priced canon 500 f4 IS today that is local, if only I had the $$$ right now after buying the 1d4 I'm all out.

The trip will mostly be of the self drive safari type with a guided safari in the middle for a few days. So should have plenty of room and time for most of the trip.

Aus.Morgo wrote in post #16744914
Thanks for the replies.

I had thought of the 100-400 but I'm not sure about that one. I had heard a lot of negative things early on that put me off it.
I'm thinking I might rent, borrow or buy the 150-600 and see how I like it to start with though I did find a well priced canon 500 f4 IS today that is local, if only I had the $$$ right now after buying the 1d4 I'm all out.

The trip will mostly be of the self drive safari type with a guided safari in the middle for a few days. So should have plenty of room and time for most of the trip.

I went on the POTN South Africa trip last August and one of the guys brought his 500mm and a 24-105 if I recall correctly, switching lenses as necessary. He may have had a set of TCs, too. I don't think he had any problems with carryon with that as a minimal kit. The only drawback was he had to switch lenses if there was something small close to the vehicle. I tried to cover that by bringing three cameras and three lenses, 400mm IS DO, 70-200 f4 IS, and 24-105 IS. My thinking was that I would have less of a dust problem if I didn't have to switch lenses. In the final analysis, I'm glad I brought the 400 DO as it gave me some great images, but with a Canon 7D and 70-200 L F4 and either 1.4 or 2x TC (Manual focus with the 2x), which that lens works well with, I could have left the rest at home. The 24-105 came in handy in urban areas, it was of rare use in Kruger.

I took my 500 and a 100-400 to the Masai Mara last year along with a 24-105 and two camera bodies. Be sure and bring a backup body for this expensive trip. By far the 100-400 was my most used lens on a 7D. No trouble with airlines.

you could PM Gabe about it:
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/member.p​hp?u=172368

he has experience with both

In the same boat and it's crunch time, 35 days from Kruger, Tembe, the Draks, etc....
Hard decisions. I've got a c300 F2.8, the s120-300 DG OS HSM-neither are going. For the 5DMiii I've chosen the Tam 150-600mm for range and lightness.
My backup body will be the 6D and with it either the Rokinon 14mm F2.8 for Milky Way shots or the Tok 16-28...haven't decided on that yet.
For near targets the she-ruler of my world will be carrying a Sony A6000 with the 70-200 (if is shows in time, if not the SEL 18-200); I'll be carrying the Canon G1X Mk II for the close stuff.
In the bag for landscapes I'm taking the A7r and the 10-18mm decked with a variable CPL and variable ND....
We plan to check no luggage. Each of us will have a backpack with the camera gear and a small pull for minimal clothing, chargers,etc.
Fingers crossed.

The Sigma. It's a sharp lens so will survive a TC well. And 2.8 is quite important for sports in terms of maintaining a low ISO with high shutter speed, and for blurring out the audience/background.

I took my sigma 120-300 and my other gear as carryon plus a dell 15inch laptop and did get hassled by the check in granted it weighed about 14kg. The trick is take out stuff you can put in your check in luggage. (Batteries, chargers etc.) I used a vertex 200 as a backpack and that alone weighed a ton...

AfricanPhoto, Advaitin do they check the weight of your clothes? My plan includes putting batteries/small lenses in my vest and pants cargo pockets, even a Nex body with cap in my clothing. If that doesn't muster then I might be in weight trouble.

AF will be too slow with an extender.