Canon 400mm 5.6L vs. Sigma 500mm 4.5 EX APO

I am considering buying the Canon 400mm 5.6L or the Sigma 500mm 4.5 EX APO. The Canon is about $2000 cheaper. Does anyone have any experience using both?
Cyberdyne Systems, you like the Sigma, any opinion on the choice?
Scott

No comparison for me as the Sigma get you both the extra 100mm and the larger aperture which tranlates to a usable manual focus 1000mm f/9 or a 700mm f/6.3 using the teleconverters. (the 1.4x T-con can still give autoficus at f/6.3 if you use the tape trick, but its a bit flaky)

It is also the lightest 500mm prime out there (in this league,. we don't count mirrors)

Ergonomically the Sigma wins too. Side by side against the $7,000.00 canon 500mm f/4 reviwers consistently say the Sigma is ergonomically better. The internal drop in filter holder is rotatable via a ring on the outside. The focus ring is larger and smooth as butter. and the tripod mount is FAR superior to Canons. (go figure?)

The Image quality would be one of those too close to call (compared to the 400 f/5.6) as some will insist the Sigma wins and some would insist the Canon wins.

To my eye (I did look closely at the Canon 400mm) once you get to this level of a high quality prime,. it is VERY hard to pick one over the other,. you are too busy kicking yourself for ever using a zoom as the image quality is just FREAKING you out!

So I would take Image quality out of the equation on this one.. they are both that good.

Instead wiegh cost vs. specs and features.

P.S. I got my Sigma 500mm used. As the resale value of such a beast does not hold up the way an "L" does,. IF you can find one you should be able to get it for about $2,000.00 or even as low as $1,600.00


But you will not have an easy time finding one. I waited about 4 months.

This is one of those odd situations.
Do you want one of the best lenses ever made?(the canon)

Or one that is still outrageously good for much less?

..the Canon is less,. he is comparing the Canon 400 f/5.6 which is about $1,100.00 or so...

..it's a damn fine lens and a great price for what you get. It is in fact the de=facto lens for beginning wildlife photographers. Seems everyone owns it at one point.

I went with the Sigma for that reason,. I wanted the "last" long telephoto I would ever buy.. not one I would want to trade up from in a year or so, which is what most Canon 400mm f/5.6 owners do eventually.

The Sigma Is A Fine Lens. I Have Owned Both, The Canon 400mm f5.6 And The Sigma 500mm f4.5. The Sigma Has Only The Limitations Placed Upon It By f4.5...
I Returned It In Favor Of The 400mm f2.8 Canon Monster... I Needed/Wanted The Faster Lens For Lowlight Conditions, Of Early Morning And Late Evening.
I Was Never Happy With The Results The Sigma f4.5 Gave Me... Not Because Of Quality, But Again The Limitations Placed Upon It By The f4.5 Aperture....

One Point In Favor Of The 400mm f5.6, It Is A Great HandHeld Photo Machine.... The 500mm f4.5 Is A Little Heavy For Constant Handheld Use.... Possible But Only For Short Cycles... Unless You Are "Arnold"

CDS Is Right, The 400mm f5.6 Is A Step Up Lens, Or A Backup Lens Once You Acquire Your Real Long Lens...

One Last Point, If You Are Serious About Photography That Requires/Demands A Long Telephoto Lens, While Convenient, Zooms Will Just Never Do The Job....

Good Luck....

Taken With The Sigma 500mm f4.5

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'