Long Lens Choice: Have been considering the Sigma 150-500 V Canon 100-400. Apart from price any knowledge on the comparison (apart from an extra 100mm obviously). I have heard so far...

Woodham Lock Loc: Woodham UK

Have been considering the Sigma 150-500 V Canon 100-400. Apart from price any knowledge on the comparison (apart from an extra 100mm obviously). I have heard so far that the Sigma does not perform well at the top end.

fly boy

I believe the Tamron has a 6-year warranty and quite a selection. I always hear from the professionals that save your money and buy a high quality lens, not the cheap ones and I dont mean price, I mean quality. Although quality does come with a price.

Pierre H.J. Dumais Loc: Mississippi Mills, Ont.

Woodham Lock wrote:

Have been considering the Sigma 150-500 V Canon 100-400. Apart from price any knowledge on the comparison (apart from an extra 100mm obviously). I have heard so far that the Sigma does not perform well at the top end.

I am really impressed and very pleased with my Sigma. There is a bit of a learning curve to work out what's best for each individual.
I shoot with a Nikon D7000.
The 'soft' issue of the top end depends, I believe, on shutter speed, support such as a monopod and dead on exposure (spot works best for me).
At 400mm it is very sharp and that way all the way down to 150mm.
Determining the best OS is again, i think, a personal choice.
The only negatives are: it is big and heavy and the sun shade is a pain to keep on the lens.

Good luck.

Pierre

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

The Sigma 150-500mm is by far my favorite wildlife and birding lens. As such, it is used almost exclusively at full zoom, and very seldom below 400mm. The results are spectacularly sharp. The biggest issue with the soft focus is that Canon users constantly put this lens down because of Canons own policies. Canon refuses to provide Sigma with its autofocus algorithms which causes Sigma to go buy Canon bodies and try to preset the lenses AF to those bodies. Nikon, Pentax, Sony and Olympus all provide their AF algorithms to Sigma and the Sigma lenses focus wonderfully on all those bodies. Thank Canon itself for the "soft focus" rumors you read about Sigma lenses.
By the way, if you buy a Sigma lens and send your body to Sigma, any body, they will focus match the lens to your body for free, and return both to you within a couple of days.
Sigma has broken way ahead of the pack when it comes to third party lenses in recent years, the quality is exemplary. And they are the ONLY camera manufacturer who makes lenses for other brand camera bodies.

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

Woodham Lock wrote:

Have been considering the Sigma 150-500 V Canon 100-400. Apart from price any knowledge on the comparison (apart from an extra 100mm obviously). I have heard so far that the Sigma does not perform well at the top end.

I have heard many people say this but never seen ANY proof, have you!!!!!

I have the 120-400 on my Canons and 150-500 on my Nikons see my site, do you see any bad long shots of sports

However I also use my lovely Giottos legs and Lensmaster gimbal(s)

fly boy

I'm going to check out the Sigma lenses. Do you know about their warranty?

greg vescuso Loc: Ozark,Mo.

Gerald W. wrote:

I'm going to check out the Sigma lenses. Do you know about their warranty?

I have use the Sigma 150- 500 for about 5 years now on a Canon 40d and as long as there is enough light the results have been great. I don't know about the warranty but I would travel around on my bicycle with the camera and lens around my neck, needless to say I was not very gentle with it and I have not had any problems with it.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

I have a friend who uses the Canon 100-400L and it gives her great results. Her photos are crisp and sharp. You couldn't go wrong with this lens.

Cameoblue Loc: British Columbia Canada

SteveR wrote:

I have a friend who uses the Canon 100-400L and it gives her great results. Her photos are crisp and sharp. You couldn't go wrong with this lens.

I have a 100-400 F5.6L IS on my 5D3 and love it. I'm sure you would not be disappointed. Fast and crisp pictures at all ranges. Here is a picture I took of my neighbours hummingbird feeder. It is about 50-60 feet from my deck. This photo is right out of the camera no PP. Also it was taken hand held.

There's good Glass then there is "L" Glass.

ISO100 F5.6 400mm 1/640 sec

Same picture only cropped

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Woodham Lock wrote:

Have been considering the Sigma 150-500 V Canon 100-400. Apart from price any knowledge on the comparison (apart from an extra 100mm obviously). I have heard so far that the Sigma does not perform well at the top end.

Woodham, I use a 100-400, mostly at 400 and with a 1.4X and it's more than sharp enough. I tape the pins so that it keeps focusing. I like that fact that its very portable, since you can lock it at 100mm and its only 8" long with hood reversed. It will fit into even the smallest of camera bags/packs. The canon is about a pound lighter than the sigma and uses less expensive and very common 77mm filters. It's a Canon L lens, that should fill in the gaps.
In all fairness, I've never even seen a Sigma. so those that have actually USED BOTH, will have to attest to the sharpness between the two. Is it perfect, no it's not. For perfection, you'll have to shell out another $10K.
Good luck Woodham

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

I loath the canon 100-400 with its push pull zoom, most irritating when you are shooting sports, ALL other lenses are zoomed by the rotation of the barrel

oldtool2 Loc: South Jersey

Gerald W. wrote:

I believe the Tamron has a 6-year warranty and quite a selection. I always hear from the professionals that save your money and buy a high quality lens, not the cheap ones and I dont mean price, I mean quality. Although quality does come with a price.

The Tamron does not compete in photo quality of either lens mentioned by the OP.

That said, and yes I have tried and used all three, I found that the Canon 100-400mm gave me better quality photos even though I had to crop a little tighter. I tried two different Sigma 150-500mm lenses and returned both. I used both for about three to four weeks before returning them because I wanted it to work for me but found they just did not compare. I wanted the added reach of 500mm but the IQ just fell off too much.

Now keep in mind that this was my experence. Do I have an exceptional Canon 100-400mm, or did I just recieve bad copies of the Sigma 150-500mm lenses? I dont know, just know what I experenced.

Before anyone starts to bash me for putting down Sigma, I own and love the Sigma 120-300m f2.8 and the Sigma 500mm f4.5 lenses. Both these lenses are tack sharp and do a bueatiful job, but between the 100-400mm and the 150-500mm the 1-4 wins every time.

Jim D

Gary Truchelut Loc: Coldspring, TX

My favorite lens is the 100-400 set at 400mm almost all the time. Tack sharp and fast focus speed with my 7D. It is my choice for hand holding action shots.

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

oldtool2 wrote:

The Tamron does not compete in photo quality of ei... (show quote)

And yet in tests the sigma beats the canon on value and they say there is so little difference in photo output the sigma wins, again people leave out the "trombone" zoom of the Canon in most posts and it to me is terrible

oldtool2 Loc: South Jersey

JR1 wrote:

And yet in tests the sigma beats the canon on value and they say there is so little difference in photo output the sigma wins, again people leave out the "trombone" zoom of the Canon in most posts and it to me is terrible

JR1,

I don't know what tests you are looking at but have seen very few that rate the Sigma over the Canon when it comes to IQ. As for the push-pull zoom, I prefer it. It is simple to use and quicker for me to use.

Yes, the Sigma is about $500.00 less expenxive but I feel the Canon "L" quality is worth it and it seems to hold its value better.

Also, and I may be wrong on this, but I remember the Sigma zoom ring turns backwards compaired to Canon lenses.

Jim D