Long lens options for wildlife / does the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 VC work with teleconverters

Hi everyone, I'm after a bit of help. With all the hype around new lenses and equipment at the moment its making me have a think about my current long lens line up. Currently I have a Tamron 70-200 VC and a Sigma 150-500. Of late I have found that the Sigma isn't as sharp as I would like at the long end and also I find at times I am shooting at high ISO due to the poor light here in the UK.

My original thought was to get the Sigma 120-300 Sport version with the new Sigma converters. Meaning that I would have fast lenses across the ranges and it would give me two separate kits. A wildlife kit (24-70 & 120-300 + extenders to go upto 600) and an everyday walkabout/portrait kit 24-70 & 70-200 again with TCs in case I needed extra length. However I can't seem to get an answer on the compatibility of the 70-200 with converters. This would give me F/2.8 across my whole range with a maximum of f/5.6

My other option is to replace the 70-200 with the Canon 70-200L IS mk11 and converters and the Canon 100-400 mk ii, both of which are reportedly very sharp even with TC. However the downside would be the low light performance at the long end (600mm f8 compared to 600mm f/5.6 with the Sigma)

I can't seem to decide which way to go so I am appealing to you kind people for assistance.

Thank you in advance

are you in a hurry to buy? if not, i'd wait a bit longer, and see what happens when people start comparing copies of the new 150-600mm's to the new 100-400mm, and i'd assume to the 120-300sport as well

i bought the 120-300Sport, and came from the 150-500OS...I pair it with the older sigma 2X, and have been happy with it, although i rarely shoot wide open...i figure stopping down a bit will help

but when i bought it, the only option of these new ones that was available was the tamron, and I didn't feel like that looked to be much of an improvement over the 150-500mm...If i were buying now, and for a dedicated majority of the time wildlife lens, i would definitely want to see how they all stack up with each other

I've used a 1.4x on my Tamron 70-200VC without any problems.

DreDaze wrote in post #17349563
are you in a hurry to buy? if not, i'd wait a bit longer, and see what happens when people start comparing copies of the new 150-600mm's to the new 100-400mm, and i'd assume to the 120-300sport as well

i bought the 120-300Sport, and came from the 150-500OS...I pair it with the older sigma 2X, and have been happy with it, although i rarely shoot wide open...i figure stopping down a bit will help

but when i bought it, the only option of these new ones that was available was the tamron, and I didn't feel like that looked to be much of an improvement over the 150-500mm...If i were buying now, and for a dedicated majority of the time wildlife lens, i would definitely want to see how they all stack up with each other

Thanks for that, I'm not in a massive rush and have been trying to see comparisons, but they seem slow to come through at the moment.

iowajim wrote in post #17349853
I've used a 1.4x on my Tamron 70-200VC without any problems.

Good to know, which 1.4x are you using?

For wild life I think you would be happier with a new sigma 150-600. its going to have a great range and hopefully at a 2K price tag, great sharpness.

if you are not stuck on having a zoom, a old 300 2.8 L could be an option or even a 400 2.8. they take teleconverters well and are of the highest quality.

The Tamron 2X TC works fine with their own 70-200. Just be aware that whenever a converter is used you will take a hit on sharpness.

I shoot with the 70-200ii with converters all the time, especially the 2xiii. it's ok, good even, but not great.

I think I should have stuck with the tamron 70-200 and added the 100-400ii. Initially I was shooting with the 70-200 VC + 150-600VC, and I swapped to the canon 70-200ii + tc's (1.4iii and 2xiii). The 1.4iii is great, hardly takes penalty, but way short for my liking. I really like the idea of a 150-600, but dont like the size. next best would be a 100-400ii with super IQ. I can keep the 70-200ii around for when I need the F2.8 at events, but I think I'm done experimenting my 100-600 options. it'll be either the 100-400ii or sigma 150-600 sport. Heavily favoring the 100-400 due to size, the sigma is obnoxiously large.

Since you list the 120-300 as an option, I will take that lens to represent the high end of your budget. As as, that lens is also hard to beat. It works very will with teleconverters. I've seen one review suggesting otherwise, but my own experience and most reviews I've see say then lens is at the worst competitive with the 100-400L II or 150-600 lenses when using TCs. And from there it has advantages:

First, when you do not need extreme reach, you have speed of f/2.8 up to 300mm.

The lens is effectively a stop faster than the Canon 100-400L, as it is a 170-420/4 with a 1.4X TC.

The lens has reach and speed over even the longest of the other lenses, a 2X TC makes it into a 240-600/5.6.

Aside from cost, the other thing to think about is the size and weight. I've been using the 120-300 Sport for two weeks. It's big and heavy, no way around it. I can handhold it, but it is much more comfortable on a monopod. It's a lot of lens to pack, and a lot of lens to haul.

JeffreyG wrote in post #17362885
Since you list the 120-300 as an option, I will take that lens to represent the high end of your budget. As as, that lens is also hard to beat. It works very will with teleconverters. I've seen one review suggesting otherwise, but my own experience and most reviews I've see say then lens is at the worst competitive with the 100-400L II or 150-600 lenses when using TCs. And from there it has advantages:

First, when you do not need extreme reach, you have speed of f/2.8 up to 300mm.

The lens is effectively a stop faster than the Canon 100-400L, as it is a 170-420/4 with a 1.4X TC.

The lens has reach and speed over even the longest of the other lenses, a 2X TC makes it into a 240-600/5.6.

Aside from cost, the other thing to think about is the size and weight. I've been using the 120-300 Sport for two weeks. It's big and heavy, no way around it. I can handhold it, but it is much more comfortable on a monopod. It's a lot of lens to pack, and a lot of lens to haul.

This kind of sums up my thinking with regards to flexibility? As to the weight, it's not really an issue because I normally carry both 70-200 and 150-500, with the 120-300 I would only carry the one with a couple of converters and I usually use a monopod with my 150-500 for additional support, so again no change here. Looks like it's the Sigma 120-300 as I can't see either the 150-600 or 100-400 giving me much more than what I've got.

UPDATE:

Having listened to all the helpful advice. I decided to take a step back and look at what I was actually trying to achieve. My goal was to improve my wildlife photography in low light, ie. forests and the like. Although I know I could use OCF, I'm not a fan of it with wildlife. So my decision was based on low light capability.

My options were:
Canon 100-400 L IS ii USM - although everyone is raving about the IQ on this lens, I felt that with regards to light, I wouldn't really be gaining much over my 150-500

Sigma 150-600 Sport - the only gain would be 100mm further reach and probably sharper at 500mm

Sigma 120-300 f2.8 Sport - although 200mm shorter at the long end, This would give me f2.8 from 120-300 (approx 2 stops more), f4 from 300-420 and f5.6 420-600. It also means that I no longer need to take my 70-200 as well in case of low light, which helps to offset the additional weight. This was the winning option

I ruled out primes because a lot of my photography involves a lot of walking and I prefer fast zooms because of the flexibility and it now means when I go out my bag will hold my Tamron 24-70, sigma 150mm macro and sigma 120-300. I always use a monopod on long lenses so there isn't any change there.

Once again thank you for all your help and advice, I thought I'd add my thought process to maybe help others in a similar boat

Update on the Tamron 70-200 VC

I have tried the lens with the Sigma TC1401 & TC2001 Converters and whilst it is possible to AF, the focus is incredibly slow and hunts A LOT, rendering it almost useless.

On the Sigma 120-300, you barely notice any difference even with the 2x.