Sigma 120-400 to replace 70-200 4.0 IS

As the title suggests I'm planning to replace the 70-200 with something longer. The twist is that I'm not a nature/wildlife photographer. I shoot weddings. I like detail candids. Ever since I went full frame the range has been a bit of a bother. Has anyone tried the Sigma indoor?

Most of what I do is flashed or in fairly well lit room. I've shot in churches with the 70-200 and had fairly decent captures at 1/30 sec. Is OS as efficient as IS?

Any other suggestions? However, funds are tight so I'm not open to spending big money at the moment.

I think in your position I'd upgrade to the 70-200 f/2.8L IS and add a 2X TC. You'll probably end up with the same if not better IQ at comparable speed, but you will have the added benefits of the 70-200 f/2.8L IS at its native lengths and speed.

nureality wrote in post #9481727
I think in your position I'd upgrade to the 70-200 f/2.8L IS and add a 2X TC. You'll probably end up with the same if not better IQ at comparable speed, but you will have the added benefits of the 70-200 f/2.8L IS at its native lengths and speed.

A 2x TC will lose 2 stops of light though, not 1.

He also stated that he doesn't have the budget for the 70-200 2.8 IS

You might consider the Sigma 100-300 f/4. Stellar optics. No OS, but I'm not sure how much OS would help you with typical moving subjects for candids.

shutterfiend wrote in post #9481679
As the title suggests I'm planning to replace the 70-200 with something longer. The twist is that I'm not a nature/wildlife photographer. I shoot weddings. I like detail candids. Ever since I went full frame the range has been a bit of a bother. Has anyone tried the Sigma indoor?

Most of what I do is flashed or in fairly well lit room. I've shot in churches with the 70-200 and had fairly decent captures at 1/30 sec. Is OS as efficient as IS?

Any other suggestions? However, funds are tight so I'm not open to spending big money at the moment.

get rid of the FF camera if it's not working out for you because you need to stop digging .

ed rader

Keep your 70-200/4 L IS lens. Forget the Sigma 120-400.

Yes, I didn't say it would lose 1 stop. f/2.8 + 2-stops = f/5.6

Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS + 2x TC = 140-400mm f/5.6
The 120-400 OS f/4.5-5.6 = 400mm @ f/5.6

nureality wrote in post #9482551
Yes, I didn't say it would lose 1 stop. f/2.8 + 2-stops = f/5.6

Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS + 2x TC = 140-400mm f/5.6
The 120-400 OS f/4.5-5.6 = 400mm @ f/5.6

my 1d mark III + 100-400L + 1.4 TC tracks very slowly and only with center point, and that's in good light.

ed rader

From all reports the 70-200 F/2.8 with a 2x looks like someone has smeared vasaline on the front element. Forget that idea.

The Sigma 100-300 F/4 that has been mentioned might be worth considering, but no IS/OS. The Sigma 120-300 F/2.8 might also be nice (maybe too big), however it's not cheap new but I have seen it quite cheap 2nd hand.

1/30s is very slow, but I suppose the flash is helping. You could try the 1.4x on your 70-200, it'll still be about as fast as the Sigma 120-400 you were considering - although I suspect not fast enough unless you can up the ISO more.

I have a thread going on right now, debating if I should change my Sigma 100-300 f4 (I also have a Sig 1.4xTC) for a 70-200 f4is. If interested in trading send me a PM.

Keep your stellar 70-200 f4 IS, add a tele-converter 1.4x, your reach is 280mm but you still have an IQ better than the Sigma and with a powerful IS and very fast AF.

gp070575 wrote in post #9488279
Keep your stellar 70-200 f4 IS, add a tele-converter 1.4x, your reach is 280mm but you still have an IQ better than the Sigma and with a powerful IS and very fast AF.

I agree with this. The pictures I've seen from the 120-400mm isn't exactly stunning, but the 70-200 f/4 IS on the other hand, is one of the sharpest zooms from Canon.
Adding a TC will still give you very good IQ with the 70-200mm.

I have to admit that the 70-200 4.0 IS is bleeding sharp and has a great IS system. I've had usable captures of people at as low as 1/30 sec. without flash! With slow candids timing is key. I follow heads and start firing when I predict it might stop momentarily. So I get moving hands and people moving in the background but a crisp clear face. I love that kind of stuff. It's a hit or miss sometime.

Anyway, the 1.4x probably wouldn't work. I'm already at the limits with f/4. I was hoping the Sigma 120-400 stayed at f/4.5 near 300mm, but that's not very likely either. The 100-300 f/4 sounds good but I need a stabilizer of some sort.

Going crop isn't much of an option either. Group shots are far better captured with a FF. And that's my b&b. I could look into upgrading my backup camera (30D) though.

Thanks for all the responses. I think I'll hang on to my 70-200 for now.

PS I just noticed that I've been promoted to a "Goldmember". I should get a life.

shutterfiend wrote in post #9489763
Anyway, the 1.4x probably wouldn't work. I'm already at the limits with f/4. I was hoping the Sigma 120-400 stayed at f/4.5 near 300mm, but that's not very likely either. The 100-300 f/4 sounds good but I need a stabilizer of some sort.

Damn! I thought Canon had come out with a 100-300mm with IS...nope, just one with USM, the other two are "regular' lenses or have the L designation. And it's stopped down to f/5.6 by 300mm.