Sigma 150-500 OS OR Sigma 100-300 + 1.4 TC

I am thinking of getting the Sigma 150-500 OS. However, I have read many reviews of the Sigma 100-300 F/4 that indicate that that lens is a very good lens.

In your opinion, would the 150-500 be equal to a 100-300 + 1.4 TC? I know I would lose the OS and a touch of length and the 100-300/TC combo would be a bit more money, but would the picture quality be different?

Thanks in advance.

Tim

What's your budget? What lenses do you already own" What will you be shooting? I ask because I consider both of those good lenses best suited for different tasks.

Orogeny wrote in post #6984203
I am thinking of getting the Sigma 150-500 OS. However, I have read many reviews of the Sigma 100-300 F/4 that indicate that that lens is a very good lens.

In your opinion, would the 150-500 be equal to a 100-300 + 1.4 TC? I know I would lose the OS and a touch of length and the 100-300/TC combo would be a bit more money, but would the picture quality be different?

Thanks in advance.

Tim

The 1-3 with a 1.4x (420mm f5.6) will be slightly sharper than the Bigmos at 420mm f6.3 (wide open). They will have similar contrast. But the strength of the f4 lens is that you have f4 at 300mm (whereas the Bigmos is at f6.3 right at 300mm). That's 1-1/3 stop faster for the EX lens. But of course, the Bigmos gives you OS, good for about 4 stops of handholding. So it is give and take. Decide what's more important, and go for it.

The 100-300mm could also double as a sports lens if you ever decided to go that route. I doubt the Bigmos could.

gasrocks wrote in post #6984603
What's your budget? What lenses do you already own" What will you be shooting? I ask because I consider both of those good lenses best suited for different tasks.

I may be able to afford either option. Currently, I have a very bad Sigma 100-300 f/4.5-6.7 DL lens (it was free, what can I say?).

I am interested in getting into bird/wildlife photography. Currently, I do mostly landscapes and I have always been interested in using a long lens for that as well so this lens will be used in that manner too.

Thanks.

Tim

I haven't used the 150-500mm, so my answer will be based on sample images i've seen here and other sites for that lens.

I've owned the 100-300mm f/4 for a couple of years. I use it for sports and birding/wildlife. the last couple of days I've been using it fo birds, shooting out of my blind , with and without a tc.

Shooting 100-300mm without the tc, the 150-500mm will not come close. The IQ of the 100-300 is just better in terms of sharpness , contrast and about everything else. From reports of the AF on the 150-500, the 100-300 will smoke it in this regard also.

The 100-300 handdles a 1.4 tc very well. It does take a little hit, but not much. Since the 150-500 is 6.3 at 420, stop the 100-300 down to 6.3 and it picks up whatever it lost, except for the AF speed. It doesn't take that big of hit on the AF, and I mainly can tell the difference when birding.

So between these 2 lens I would go with the 100-300mm f/4. But if your going to use it mainly for birding, I would take a hard look at the Canon 400mm 5.6 prime lens.