Image Quality - Sigma 50-500 and Canon 28-300L IS

Hi All,

I'm just wondering if anyone who's familiar with both these lenses could give me a little advice on image quality. I shoot all kinda of things but spend a lot of time doing aviation photography, for which the 50-500 is perfectly suited, but aviation is almost all I use it for. Recently I've been thinking it might be nice to have a lens that I can use for aviation and a lot of my non aviation shooting.

I'm very happy with the quality of the 50-500 and have been using it for around 15 months. It gives me consistently good results and I think it was the best decision when I bought it (my other option was the 100-400L IS). Can I expect to see much of a difference in image quality going from the 50-500 to the 28-300L?

All info geatly appreciated.

Paul

What we do know for sure is that the IQ from 300-500mm is going to be a lot better with the Bigma I wouldn't do the trade. The Bigma is a unique lens and you seem happy with it. Giving up 200mm on the tele end doesn't make sense to me either. The 100-400 IS seems a much more reasonable alternative, but I don't know for what you do that you should give up the Bigma in this case either.

FWIW, I've got a comparison of the 1-4 and Bigma at my site.

LightRules wrote in post #4244857
What we do know for sure is that the IQ from 300-500mm is going to be a lot better with the Bigma

Have you got any data/samples that shows the difference?

LightRules wrote in post #4244857
What we do know for sure is that the IQ from 300-500mm is going to be a lot better with the Bigma I wouldn't do the trade. The Bigma is a unique lens and you seem happy with it. Giving up 200mm on the tele end doesn't make sense to me either. The 100-400 IS seems a much more reasonable alternative, but I don't know for what you do that you should give up the Bigma in this case either.

FWIW, I've got a comparison of the 1-4 and Bigma at my site.

I didn't say I was giving the Bigma up necessarily, I'm just looking at the options. The 100-400 is out of the question for the simple reason 100mm at the wide end would limit me for the majority of places I shoot at, and there's no point whatsoever is buying gear that limits you, hence why I went for the 50-500 although I have used the 100-400 and it certaily is a wonderful lens if it suits your purposes. On the subject of focal length, I don't necessarily 'need' the extra 200mm, although it does come in handy at times. As I say, I'm just looking at a few options.

Thanks for your response and your time.

Paul

asylumxl wrote in post #4244893
Have you got any data/samples that shows the difference?

For some reason when I tried pumping the 28-300mm to 500mm it wouldn't budge!

asylumxl wrote in post #4244893
Have you got any data/samples that shows the difference?

As the 28-300 doesn't cover 300-500 he doesn't actually need any data.

Paul

LightRules wrote in post #4244914
For some reason when I tried pumping the 28-300mm to 500mm it wouldn't budge!

Too funny.

But the Canon puts the smackdown on the Bigma from 28mm-49mm

Seriously, I can't see how you could trade one for the other, the Bigma is most often used from 300-500mm.. so trading for a 300mm zoom, .. I mean you could fill that range rather well with any of a number of zooms. Whereas from 300-500mm, there are only a small handfull to chose from, and even less worth considering.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #4244930


But the Canon puts the smackdown on the Bigma from 28mm-49mm

Ha! Indeed. No point in trying to squash the Bigma down below 50mm... You'll only hurt your fingers!

Paul

Tony-S wrote in post #4244918
Too funny.

I meant both at 300mm. Also, Bigma isn't 500mm either, you can only budge it to 463 or so... Stop being so pedantic.

LightRules wrote in post #4244914
For some reason when I tried pumping the 28-300mm to 500mm it wouldn't budge!

Your being too gentle, you have to pump harder

You have to pump the bigma a couple times, much like you would when the wife/girlfriend/sister​(in West Virginia) is away...

asylumxl wrote in post #4245601
I meant both at 300mm. Also, Bigma isn't 500mm either, you can only budge it to 463 or so... Stop being so pedantic.

Sorry, we can only read what you write, not what you mean.

cdifoto wrote in post #4245635
You have to pump the bigma a couple times, much like you would when the wife/girlfriend/sister​(in West Virginia) is away...

I hear you have to pump it even when your wife isn't away... Tough luck...

asylumxl wrote in post #4245601
I meant both at 300mm. Also, Bigma isn't 500mm either, you can only budge it to 463 or so... Stop being so pedantic.

EXIF date says 500mm and it goes in closer than a 300mm. That's all I need to know!

Paul