So, then - for Birds & Wildlife, it's either the 100-400, or the 150-600, is it? ... Or, do you have a better Zoom Option? (Page 2): Probably about f9.5, Von ....

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

vonzip wrote:

That's one big lens! I wonder what the maximum aperture is?

Probably about f9.5, Von ....

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Leicaflex wrote:

Tamron for the wild life.

So we have one vote for the Tamron 150-600 (as opposed to the Sigma 150-600) .... thanks, LF ...

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

phlash46 wrote:

You have both! Happy Thanksgiving!

Now, THERE's the perfect answer!!! .... Why didn't I think of that, Phlash?

Thanks for the suggestion ...

Happy Thanksgiving 2U2 ... enjoy your feast!!!!

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

DNW wrote:

WOW....you just as well use a telescope!

Yeah, but there's some shortcomings ...

After all, those things are designed for looking at nebula .... up in space ....

Not medullas ....

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

vonzip wrote:

That's one big lens! I wonder what the maximum aperture is?

F5.6 to F8.

https://www.popphoto.com/gear/2012/07/insane-zoom-nikkor-1200-1700mm#page-2

It was used during the terrorist attach a few years ago in France. It had a Canon body attached to it. At least they could get intimately close images outside the blast radius . . .

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Gene51 wrote:

F5.6 to F8.

https://www.popphoto.com/gear/2012/07/insane-zoom-nikkor-1200-1700mm#page-2

It was used during the terrorist attach a few years ago in France. It had a Canon body attached to it. At least they could get intimately close images outside the blast radius . . .

You mean BY the terrorists ... or IN CATCHING the terrorists, Gene?

That's fast, heh? ... f5.6 to f8 ....

You'd probably have to mortgage both your OWN house AND your mother-in-law's house, though - right? ... to get one?

bull drink water Loc: pontiac mi.

where I live and where I can get to, my best animal shots are at the zoo. I use whatever I have. fx lenses on dx bodies , zooms and primes. from 300 to 800mm's. with teleconverters.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

bull drink water wrote:

where I live and where I can get to, my best animal shots are at the zoo. I use whatever I have. fx lenses on dx bodies , zooms and primes. from 300 to 800mm's. with teleconverters.

Oh, okay, Bull ... so you have no use for a lens like this, then, huh ?

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Chris T wrote:

And, if it's one of these, do you pick the Canon over the Sigma (100-400) or the Sigma over the Tamron (150-600) ....

My preference - Sony A99II and Minolta 400MM F4.5 APO - and then use the in camera 1.1-2X Clear Image Zoom - gets you to 800mm f4.5

the 400 4.5 is small and relatively lightweight.....

Otherwise, For crop frame = 100-400 and if a Canon body, then the Canon 100-400 for the AF advantage. If a Nikon crop body, the 200-500.

And full frame =150-600 - Sigma or Tammy? - flip a coin.

Jim Bob

Chris T wrote:

Yes, I suppose so ... but, NOT ... if you shoot with Canon ...

Forgive him. He’s ignorant. Canon 100-400 version II.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Jim Bob wrote:

Forgive him. He’s ignorant. Canon 100-400 version II.

Oh, alright, Jim Bob ... 100-400 v2 Canon, then ... not the new Sigma version ... have you looked at it / used it?

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

imagemeister wrote:

My preference - Sony A99II and Minolta 400MM F4.5 APO - and then use the in camera 1.1-2X Clear Image Zoom - gets you to 800mm f4.5

the 400 4.5 is small and relatively lightweight.....

Otherwise, For crop frame = 100-400 and if a Canon body, then the Canon 100-400 for the AF advantage. If a Nikon crop body, the 200-500.

And full frame =150-600 - Sigma or Tammy? - flip a coin.

That'd make sense to me, Larry ... assuming you could find one .... (Minolta 400mm, I mean) ...

Why not the new Sigma 100-400, Larry? .... Have you tried it, or used it? ... note: it's only $800 .... (Canon's original is $1300 ... new L is $2200)

Not sure about flipping a coin between the Tamron and Sigma 150-600 ... there's a price difference ... Contemporary is $1100, Sports is 2 grand / Tamron $1100 also, but the G2 creeps up to $1400 ... you could flip a coin between the low-cost options ... but not the Pro-Quality ones ... Sigma's is $600 more than Tamron's ...

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Chris T wrote:

That'd make sense to me, Larry ... assuming you co... (show quote)

"That'd make sense to me, Larry ... assuming you could find one .... (Minolta 400mm, I mean) ..."

They ARE available for about $16-1700 ....about the same price as a Sigma S 150-600 ....someday, maybe I will get one 8-(

"Why not the new Sigma 100-400, Larry? .... Have you tried it, or used it? ... note: it's only $800 .... (Canon's original is $1300 ... new L is $2200)"

The Imatest numbers of the Sigma 100-400 are very CLOSE to the Canon VII @400 wide open ! -For most subjects it will be OK - I just do not think the AF of the Sigma will be as good as a Canon lens and you cannot use a 1.4X with it and is why I just picked up a Canon 400 prime for $650 - and Canon prime is a WHITE lens so there is an "appearance" factor- AND, it has a tripod collar. If I think I need a zoom, I use the Sigma 100-300 f4 with a 1.4X....

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

imagemeister wrote:

"That'd make sense to me, Larry ... assuming ... (show quote)

All very sound reasoning to me, Larry ... Canon it is, then ....

I didn't know you could use the 1.4x on the Sigma 100-300 f4 ... but not on the new 100-400, huh?

See, now ... all of these cost-factor elements are quite important to some .....

Damn the Torpedoes! ... Full Speed Ahead!!! .... eh, Larry?

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Chris T wrote:

All very sound reasoning to me, Larry ... Canon it is, then ....

I didn't know you could use the 1.4x on the Sigma 100-300 f4 ... but not on the new 100-400, huh?

See, now ... all of these cost-factor elements are quite important to some .....

Damn the Torpedoes! ... Full Speed Ahead!!! .... eh, Larry?

The Sigma 100-400 is at f6.3 to start - the 100-300 is an f4 - BIG difference.

I believe a Kenko 1.4 will physically FIT the 100-400 but then the AF is at f9 - plus I do not think the Canon f8 AF enabled bodies will recognize the Sigma lens for f8 AF .....and even if it did fit and work, there is no tripod collar to help stabilize @ 560mm !

If your intent is to specialize on moving subjects then facilitating AF becomes a major consideration.

So, the Sig 1-400 is OK IMO for other than BIF and never going beyond 400mm ......without cropping.