Sigma or canon

Interested in a bird lens after a weekend at sea island South Carolina. Would you recommend the Sigma 150-600 or old canon 100-400? I'd like to get either one used and spend under $1,000. Thanks

Are you going to used it mostly for bird? If so, I'd recommend 400mm f5.6L

2loose wrote in post #17653555
Are you going to used it mostly for bird? If so, I'd recommend 400mm f5.6L

That's what I have on my 7D, and I love it.

Another vote for the Canon 400 F5.6 L, highest quality lens in your price range and VERY rarely too long so the lack of the zoom function is not important. Nice fast AF too.

calypsob wrote in post #17653363
Interested in a bird lens after a weekend at sea island South Carolina. Would you recommend the Sigma 150-600 or old canon 100-400? I'd like to get either one used and spend under $1,000. Thanks

Depends on what you are shooting.

If you are shooting mostly perched birds, I'd get a 150-600 flavor (Sigma, Tamron, etc).

If you're shooting all birds in flight, then a 400 F5.6 prime is the way to go.
Alternatively, a lot of people also favor the 300 F4 with a 1.4x TC as an option for versatility.

Lastly, if you have no idea, and you just want to try to get a little of everything, there's the 100-400 MKI used (but really, it's way less common to need less than 400mm when birding, so I would really favor the 400m prime for the speed and sharpness).

I shoot with a 150-600. I do birds in flight fine, as well as perched stuff. But I shoot a lot of smaller birds, not eagles and stuff. So for me, maximum reach is essential and I pretty much live at 600mm 90% of the time probably. But again, I'm mostly doing song birds, shore line birds, etc, smaller varieties. Sometimes a big pelican or osprey, but you can do larger birds at 400mm much easier. But for small birds, even 600mm isn't enough, unless you get real close.

Very best,

Ok all good to know. Is Image Stabilization important if i have fast shutter speeds? Ive also considered an ed mika adapted 500mm f4.5

I would not bother with an adapted manual focus lens. for birding, you'd be far better off with the focal length limitations of the 400mm f/5.6L vs. the AF limitations of the FD 500mm..

For AF speed, price and superior IQ you want the 400mm f/5.6L

For Reach and price it's the Sigma 600mm C

For Everything better BUT price, the 100-400mm MkII is the best of show.

If you have $1K to spend I'd look at either the 400mm prime or the Sigma.

Thanks. The lack of is on the 400 bugs me but it is blatently a sharper lens in the pictures ive been looking at. 300mm F4 is becoming more appealing as well with is and tc options. Again thanks alot for the help folks.

I handhold my 7D and 400/5.6 90% of the time. I use a tripod when I shoot at less than 500th of a second in low light.

I wouldn't get hung up on the lack of or inclusion of IS. Any stabilization system is limited by how fast it can move that extra piece of glass - naturally there is a limit to how fast it can be moved. Bird photography generally demands higher shutter speeds (1/500+) where IS only serves to slow down your AF. I am now down to 3 IS lenses (16-35 F4 L IS, 300 F2.8 L IS and 800 F5.6 L IS) and I have no use for IS on any of them - to me one of the best features of the 400 F5.6 L is the LACK of IS!

You mention the 300 F4 L IS, I loved my copy - it is simply a superb lens for the price! I would suggest though that it is a little shorter than ideal for birds and do not, under any circumstances, use the IS on moving subjects. It has an old IS system which was great in it's day, but it really interferes with AF and tracking on moving subjects though. Despite that it is a lovely piece of glass and rewarded me with many wonderfully detailed images. I generally wasn't too impressed with extenders on it though - just me.

I use the Sigma 150-600C and have been very impressed with it. I am very amateur to say the least in this adventure of photography, but have really enjoyed learning with the Sigma. For 1000 bucks, it is a great buy.

I often wonder about about these sort of discussions and how it aplies to how and where photographers take their photos. . Heres a pic, not the best in the world, but it is a good example I think of what I mean. Its taken in the shade on a walk about near home. Shot with a 7D2 and the Sigma 150-600 Sports. 1/400 F6.3 and iso 2000 (M with Auto iso) and some general lightroom stuff.