Long-ish lens pick?

I'd really like a Sigma 120-300 f/2.8, but since I don't have over $2000 US, I got to think less expensively. So, for longish range shooting, what is better and why?

Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS (Image Stabilizer) USM Autofocus Lens for about $1400 US

Sigma Zoom Telephoto 100-300mm f/4 EX DG IF HSM Autofocus Lens for Canon EOS for about $900 US.


Unless you know of a better option, then....

i dont know what your needs are but i was just looking for a 400mm+ lens and ordered the sigma 50-500mm. So far i like it.

I'll second the Bigma. Will run you about $1000 new and can get you all the way out to 500mm. You'll need a tripod, though as its a big lens.

If you have your mind set on the Sigma 120-300, used ones go from about 1600 for a Non DB model and 1800 for a DG model., which is slightly more than a new 100-400L

A tripod is not needed for the Bigma. I use mine on a monopod. Much quicker and more versitile.

DO you need 300-400mm? You'll have a faster lens all the way through with the Sigma. It's the brother of the 120-300. Delievers very good images.

For handholding, a telephoto with IS is always nice, if you deal with times where light isn't as high.

It ultimately comes down to how much reach you need.

The IS lens gets my vote. Telephoto and IS just go hand in hand.

I'd go the 100-400 IS - to my tastes the IS is more useful than the extra 100mm on the bigma.

Okay, no silly comments, but I was "bored" and wondering about this stuff, and the Bigma or Bigmonster. Your thoughts are appreciated, and they got me to thinking. So I created this quick and dirty chart.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

Do you want length, handholding or IQ mainly?

I would say the 100-300mm f4 is the best of the three IQ wise and best in lower light and takes a 1.4x very well. Needs stability to give the last tad of quality that makes it an awesome lens.

The Bigma is very good IQ wise and goes to 500mm and down to 50mm, tho it needs light and stability. Great safari lens if you self drive and nice price relatively.

The 100-400mm IS L has good IQ, costs a lot more, has a push-pull zoom action which some like and some don't, is white, which some like and some don't, but is usually nicely handholdable and is lighter in weight.

Having had all three my next lens will likely as not be a Bigma again as I prefer the length, the light is not a huge deal in Africa and I will mainly beanbag shoot. If I was walking around I would go for the Canon and put up with push-pull.

Well, Africa would be nice, but can't go with no gear, so years away from Africa. Maybe 25 years

I want image quality, with some reach. I have a 70-200, but at times it is "half short" or so. Thus the 300 to 400 range seems like all I'd need (until I get it, then it will be too short too).

The 120-300 just seems like a great lens, even though it isn't a Canon or an "L". Sigmas do not bother me like they do some others. But the 100-400 seems like a good companion to the 70-200, but the f numbers are a bit higher than the better and fixed f Sigma 100-300, but is it too close to the 70-200? The Bigma is nice, but it seems too big and heavy. I'd use a monopod though. Darn decisions.

Maybe you can rent a lens or two to get some better idea of what you really need?

It can be really hard deciding these purchases, and this is where a less-than-open mind ( ie Canon bigot...?? ) makes life easier!

Monopod may or may not be enough for a 50-500, depending on how good you are using one. It's a real front-heavy lens.

Front heavy was what I thought. And the filter size is proof of a big heavy front too. If a couple of ducks get in a row soon, I'd be looking in the Canon 100-400 or used Sigma 120-300 range. Otherwise, I'm shorter on money honey, so the Sigma 100-300 is more like it, or the Bigma too I guess, but I'd want to try them both to see how they feel to me.

I'd recommend the 120-300 2.8, but it is a heavy bugger. Not the easiest to handhold, but quality lens. And of course the 100-300 will be less heavy.

But then the 100-400 is defintely a versatile one.

200mm f2.8 and a 2x TC.