100-400 or 200-500

The Tamron 200-500 does not have full time manual override, so you can't just correct focus manually if AF picks up on a twig in front of the subject. Once you get used to using full time manual override you will never buy a lens without it.

I would choose between the Sigma 50-500 and Canon 100-400, both of which have manual focus override. I took test shots with both lenses before making my decision and image quality is about the same. On some shots the Sigma looked a little sharper than the Canon, but not so much that it would make me choose the Sigma over the Canon.

The Sigma has the variety of a better focal length range. Both the 50mm and 500mm ends of the range are good. It also zooms by twisting a ring, which I prefer to the trombone action of the Canon.

The Canon 100-400 has image stabilization, which is a real advantage if you do much hand-held shooting. Also, it uses 77 mm filters, which are cheaper than the 86 mm filters for the Sigma and are interchangeable with filters for other common lenses such as the 70-200/2.8, 24-70, 17-40 and 16-35.

I would make my choice between the 50-500 and 100-400 and would base it on shooting style. If you use a tripod or other support most of the time the 50-500 gives you more range of focal lengths. If you do much hand held photography, the IS is a useful feature.

I chose the 50-500 because I use a tripod or window pod most of the time. On my trip to South Africa I used a private vehicle, so I could mount my lens/camera on a window pod most of the time. I used the 500 end of the zoom range very often, especially for birds and small animals. (I use a 20D. Your 5D will be even more limited for telephoto use.) The only time I wished I had taken the 100-400 was on an early morning game drive when we had to go in the guide's truck and shoot hand held. I managed to get some good shots with the 50-500, but would have had a higher percentage of keepers if I had image stabilization.

Someone mentioned the 300/4. I took a 400/5.6 on a previous trip and missed some great shots when game appeared too close to the vehicle and then moved off while I was trying to change lenses. It will give sharper pictures, but not that much sharper and a missed picture is not as good. If you do go that route, be sure to also take a 1.4x teleconverter. I found that I wanted all the focal length I could get, even with a 500 mm lens on a 1.6x crop camera.

Whatever lens you choose, have a good trip. With any luck you will come back with some great photos. Don't let the guides rush you so much trying to see the BIG 4 that you miss out on opportunities to spend more time waiting for good compositions or photographing other interesting subjects such as colourful birds and tiny antelope. I found that the main hinderence to getting good photos was other people who just want to see something and then move on to something else. My best photos came when I could wait and watch for a more interesting action or composition to develop.

Thanks ScottE, thats usefull. We have our own vehicle for the first week. I have a monopod and tripod and hopt to be able to use them. The second week in Bots will be guided and is customed to 4 people (our friends and us) so should be reasonably easy to guide the guides on what we want to see. Of course this means we are not in control so I have no idea if using a tripod will be possible in vehicle, thats why I am a bit nervous about using a non IS lens. I know both the Bigma and 1-4 are about the same weight and I can reselll the canon if need be without too much loss....not so with the 3rd party. descisions eh. I have contact Kerso to find out about availablity, we will see.

Cheers for the guidance everyone.

Canon 100-400 hands down.

hef wrote in post #2206893
Canon 100-400 hands down.

Just the opposite. If you have the camera up in your hands the Canon 100-400 is the better choice. If the camera is down on the tripod, you have better range with the Sigma 50-500.

Hmm - availability, you'd have to check but it should be OK.

I am feeling the pinch on the 5D, you have to crop aggressively and the lens never felt as comfortable as it was on the crop cameras where it maxed out at 480mm.

Canon official TCs will not fit at all, period - the 70-300's element is backed all the way out. I use a Kenko 1.5X and AF racks full forward/full back and never hits the target, so it's MF all the way but I retain focus assist. STILL not long enough at times.

I think if push is going to come to shove, take just the 24-105 and 100-400 and one more item, a little bit of faith in yourself that you'll be able to adapt.

Get the 100-400mm, you will be very pleased with its performance. And yes you will not want to part with it. I have one I need to sell it but I just can't let it go

If you're expecting to be shooting some or all the time from in a vehicle, get the IS. Even if there's roomfor a tripod, motor vibrations can get transmitted through that - better to act as shock absorber by hand-holding and let IS take care of the rest.

ScottE wrote in post #2207392
Just the opposite. If you have the camera up in your hands the Canon 100-400 is the better choice. If the camera is down on the tripod, you have better range with the Sigma 50-500.

but the OP was comparing Canon 100-400 IS to the TAMROM 200-500. That's why i suggested 100-400...

I have had both the Bigma and currently have the Tamron. Here are some quick highlights;

Tamron - Slow AF, light weight, long, good image quality, have to turn the zoom ring a lot!
Bigma, fast AF, heavy, good image quality but not as good as Tamron.

Canon 100-400, better then all the others, hands down. I almost never shoot higher then 200mm, so I only have the Tamron for occational use. If used the 300mm/400mm range more I'd have the Canon 100-400mm or a 300mm prime.

The Tamron is unquestionably cheaper, thus easier to get. I thought about it a long time. Once I handled the 100-400 though I felt that I would always want it over the tamron (and when I first looked, I could have had the Tamron for $800.00). But, I saved my pennies and held out for the 100-400L. And I'm glad I did. Handholding at 400mm is no easy task - the IS makes it alot more manageable, for me anyway.

I first purchased a Sigma 50-500, no complaints about image quality, but past 200mm always needed a tripod attached. Sold it at a loss.

Then purchased the Tamron 200-500, again no complaints about image quality, but again always needed a tripod attached. Sold it at a loss.

I now have a Canon 100-400, no complaints about image quality and never use a tripod with it. Will never sell it. Wish I would have purchased it first.

Serious question, because I hope to do a photo safari some day--isn't the extra length a big advantage on a FF camera when shooting wildlife there? Or is 400mm enough?

It seems like if your serious your using primes, if your going on a safari or something and want just one lens you get the 100-400L. The 300mm F4L seems like a pretty good lens for the $ though.

I feel better after reading these stories, because it seems I wasn't the only one who made the mistake.

I could actually handhold the Bigma and get decent useable results at 2 stops under the recommended shutter speeds at full extension. The problem is, as I later discovered, I can only do this when the Bigma is parallel to the ground. Sadly, wildlife and birds do not exactly let you do this. Once we got into the field it became a whole new ball game. After swinging it all over the place I couldn't even get sharp shots at 1/1000. Zoom was tremendously hard to turn due to the weight of the barrel and all the glass, which is the reason why I like the Canon push/pull a lot better. Beyond a certain weight it gets difficult to zoom fast and precise with a ring. The 70-200/2.8 series is about as much as I want to live with, in fact there are times where I wish it was push/pull. We'll see about the dust pump when I get it.

300/4 IS is basically perfect except for one key issue: it's not a zoom. That's all. If you can live with a fixed 300 or a TC on it, go for it. I still love my 300 dearly.... it's going on location with me tomorrow