Birding lens dilemma

Ok; despite countless copies of this thread I need help lol
Basically I was all set on buying a Canon 100-400mm IS, simply waiting for one to appear on ebay- but after doing so much research on here I'm no looking seriously at the Sigma 150-500mm OS which seems to get nothing but good reviews- and is reckoned by many to even out perform the Canon???
I'm basing a lot on reviews such as THIS
Now the thing is I've used the Canon 100-400 in the past and liked it, and I also used to have a Bigma but that was when I was a bit younger (yes too young and so found hand holding it tough)

I'd be using it mainly for birding but wildlife also
I'd like to say (as a back-row Rugby forward) I can now cope with a reasonably heavy lens... but I'm sure I read in that review that some consider the OS in better than the IS...?
I think they're about the same price... maybe the Canon's slightly more...is that because of L glass- I'm not so sure I'd notice much difference in my photos... yet lol still a long way to go before that takes affect

Would love to know what you all think and I'll continue looking through reviews and photos (btw most photos I've seen taken with the Sigma are amazing but I only worry that's more to do with the actual photographer- I get the impression the Canon is more user friendly for less able photogs...?)

Thanks
Richard

I bought the Sigma for my birding just over a month ago and love it, you may want to have a look at this thread https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=658629

I'm in basically the same position as Ferco. I was leaning toward the Sigma. But have read enough bad stories about the Sigma QC to make me rethink that. I don't want to try out 3 or 4 different copies of that lens to try to find the good one. The range is really attractive, and the OS sounds like a winner... but still, the 100-400 seems like more of a safe bet.

Having read all of the other threads on this topic, I'm still interested in any new comments that might come up here. For me, cost isn't an issue, but the 500mm reach of the cheaper Sigma is attractive... Tough decision!

I got it a few weeks ago and since then, it NEVER left my 40D.
Now, being honest, it WON'T outperform the 100-400L. At least not my copy and not for my newbie untrained eyes. But it's DANG CLOSE!
I was fortunate enough to get an VERY sharp copy. OS is ROCK SOLID and gives you up to 4 stops, while IS will give you 2 stops. At 500mm I find the 6.5 a bit soft (but perfectly acceptable). It gets 100% better if you stop it to F/8.
The thing IS HEAVY AND HUGE, so be aware of that so you won't be disappointed like Kenji.

What I like the most in this lens? IT WILL AF WITH AN 1.4X KENKO TELE, giving me 700mm effective on a FF or 1120mm effective on a APS-C. Now, that's a HUGE difference. The price difference, at least for myself, wasn't about the same as you stated. My copy costed me 800 USD, while the Canon on the same store was 1450 USD. That's a big difference for me at least.

Here you go.. a few pics I have all without any PP:

The sigma is quite alot cheaper- £700 vs £1200. However, the simga isn't as sharp as the canon wide open, but if its stopped down to about f8 or f9, there is hardly any difference.

also the OS of the sigma is meant to be four stops, whereas the canon is only two.

Why do you think the Canon is more user friendly? I have been lusting after the Sigma 150-500mm for sometime and based on everything I have read, looked at and pixel peeped it is a fantastic lens at a very good price!

Just back from shooting at local nest site. I had the 150-500 on Monopod with Canon 50D mounted for backup while I mainly shot with a 600 and the 1DM3. Just three or four shots with the 500 and I didn't pay attention to anything other than grabbing a few to compare with the 600. I should have put more effort into it, so this is not a good example. I should have compensated the exposure for the light off the surroundings, consequently I post processed this quite a bit, plus this is about 1/4 of the original frame, 800ISO, 1/1000s @ f6.3, 500mm

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

thanks all- giving me a lot to think about; specially as I just read that link and a head on comparison with the 100-400 IS... it's really tough
I'm getting the general impression that the Canon has slightly better IQ but the Sigma has better reach AND OS so I need to decide if the small amount of IQ loss will be noticeable in my photos... I can just afford the Canon and I don't need any other lenses so won't be spending the saved money on anything urgent= money isn't really an issue I guess

Arg this is such a hard choice!

Hi Richard,

I guess you need to take a look at this website: http://www.juzaphoto.c​om …20-400_150-500_50-500.htm

Juza has done a great review and heads-on compare of the canon 100-400, sigma 120-400, sigma 150-500 and the bigma.

Have fun!

Jan

Check out this review....
http://www.juzaphoto.c​om …20-400_150-500_50-500.htm

jvanmil wrote in post #7548534
Hi Richard,

I guess you need to take a look at this website: http://www.juzaphoto.c​om …20-400_150-500_50-500.htm

Juza has done a great review and heads-on compare of the canon 100-400, sigma 120-400, sigma 150-500 and the bigma.

Have fun!

Jan

HA ha ha ha, looks like where on the same page...Jeff

wow that's an impressive review- ok now I'm really torn...I've even begun considering the 120-400 OS
But realistically I think it's still between the 150-500 OS and the Canon 100-400 IS
This is really tough!

QC does it for me. I love my Sigma 17-70, but wonder if I just got lucky ... high failure rates across the board are a good indicator of design & manufacturing quality. I have vowed to stay with Canon.

also remember that the 150-500mm is f6.3 from 300mm onwards which is pretty slow, whereas the 100-400 is f 5.6 at 400mm

bobthedog wrote in post #7549013
also remember that the 150-500mm is f6.3 from 300mm onwards which is pretty slow, whereas the 100-400 is f 5.6 at 400mm

If you shooting birds, f6.3 or f5.6 is no difference IMHO. Even with superteles which can do f4, you most probably shooting at f8.