Gear Decisions: About to purchase a sigma 120-300 2.8 sport. And a 150-600 sigma 5-6.3 contemporary lens. And a 5d mkiii body. My question is should i purchase the 150-600 for 1000.00...

DonOles

About to purchase a sigma 120-300 2.8 sport. And a 150-600 sigma 5-6.3 contemporary lens. And a 5d mkiii body. My question is should i purchase the 150-600 for 1000.00 or just use the 120-300 with my 7d crop or add a 1.4 tc to the 120-300 and use that 1000.00 to buy the 5dmkiv body instead of the 5dmkiii. I shoot baseball in summer and hockey in the winter.
Thanks

johntaylor333

Personally, I would buy the 5D IV and the 120-300 with a 1.4X. Much lighter and a better camera, particularly at high ISO

Idaho

You'll need to stay with a 2.8 lens for sports and a zoom range that allows you to use just one lens most of the time. The 1.4 tc is out. You'll want the camera that can give you the best results with high ISO settings and meet your focusing requirements for sports action. This means the most expensive body you can justify. If you can't justify the cost of what you would like to have - just buy it anyway.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

As money seems to not be an object, go with the 5DIV and a 100-400L II with a 1.4x III for your long distance outdoor needs. The Canon lens extended will still outperform the Sigma.

DonOles

Will the Canon 100-400mm be fast enough for indoor hockey and outdoor baseball

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

DonOles wrote:

Will the Canon 100-400mm be fast enough for indoor hockey and outdoor baseball

I meant for the outdoor daylight work replacing your idea for a second lens at 150-600, not a replacement for a f/2.8 zoom. The 5DIV will be light-years different than the 7D at higher ISOs as well as significant room for cropping of images.

You mentioned a 1.4 tc. I don't know enough about Sigma to know if that is a technical option on their 120-300 zoom. I believe the Canon model TC is not an option to mount to the Sigma lens. You'd have to determine if the auto focus responsiveness of an extended Sigma lens is acceptable as compared to a zoom that natively covers the extended range.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

DonOles wrote:

About to purchase a sigma 120-300 2.8 sport. And a 150-600 sigma 5-6.3 contemporary lens. And a 5d mkiii body. My question is should i purchase the 150-600 for 1000.00 or just use the 120-300 with my 7d crop or add a 1.4 tc to the 120-300 and use that 1000.00 to buy the 5dmkiv body instead of the 5dmkiii. I shoot baseball in summer and hockey in the winter.
Thanks

I do not have the Sigma 120-300mm Sport... but I understand it works very well with a 1.4X or even a 2X. I'd definitely get that it and one of the teleconverters first (research which TC folks recommend and are using). I'd hold off on the 150-600mm until you see if you really need it.

The 120-300mm is pretty big and heavy... You may later want to add something smaller and more "hand-holdable" such as a 100-400 or similar. Canon's 100-400 II is superb. Or, if you already have a 70-200 f/2.8 or f/4, that might serve along with the bigger lens.

I really don't see much reason to use a full frame camera for sports, if that's most of what you do. I might even hold off on that or if you primarily want it for other purposes, maybe even consider a different model.

If you're still using original 7D... you may want to consider the 7D II sometime in the future. It's a nice step up.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

DonOles wrote:

Will the Canon 100-400mm be fast enough for indoor hockey and outdoor baseball

Outdoor daytime baseball... no problem.

Nightime baseball and indoor hockey... it really depends upon the lighting. The 100-400mm is an f/4.5-5.6 lens (actually 2/3 stop faster than the Sigma 100-400 f/5-6/3 through much of the range... faster than the Tamron 100-400, too).

I mostly use my 100-400 II outdoors in daylight.... Unless lighting is exceptionally good, indoors I switch to a 300/4 and 70-200/4.... Or when lighting is worse: 300/2.8 and 70-200/2.8.... Or, when lighting is REALLY bad... 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 135/2.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Idaho wrote:

You'll need to stay with a 2.8 lens for sports and a zoom range that allows you to use just one lens most of the time. The 1.4 tc is out. You'll want the camera that can give you the best results with high ISO settings and meet your focusing requirements for sports action. This means the most expensive body you can justify. If you can't justify the cost of what you would like to have - just buy it anyway.

Idaho...Why is an f2.8 so important for sports? For budgetary reasons I just purchased a Tamron 100-400 f4.5-6.3 for my daughter to use on her 7500 for shooting my grandson's soccer and basketball. The 7500 allows her to crank the ISO as high as 6000 as needed. She's able to stop action and get some very good shots, as well as use the burst capability of the 7500.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

If you are not too far from your subjects the 120-300 lens should serve you well. A 1.4 tele converter should work well with the lens since you will only be loosing 1 stop of light.
I am not a Canon user but I have learned over the years to save and not to burn money. A Canon 6D at around $1000 will be considerably cheaper than buying the camera you have in mind and with 20 Mp. you have all the pixels you could need to go 20-30 inch enlargements and you will not be printing that size very often.
Do not buy the 150-600 lens for now unless you do see an actual, frequent use for it. If you are a professional and sell your pictures then you have more freedom, in my humble opinion, to buy whatever you want.

beerhunter13 Loc: Southern Ontario, Canada

I use the Sigma 120 to 300 mm, f/2.8 Sports lens with Canon 1.4x and 2x TC's on a 7D2 and a 5D3 with great results. Money was not an issue but portability and the ability to zoom was. When used with the TC's and camera bodies I have great versatility. This lens is sharper than the 150 to 600mm. It is a bit of a heavy brute but can be still handheld for a day in the woods covering 10 to 15km.

98corvette Loc: Macon, Georgia

I have the version 2 of this lens which only costs about $1400 used on ebay. Have used it for baseball shooting from right field (best seat in the house and no fences) with a 1.4 and 2.0 Sigma tele converter. As this lens is the same as the new one except for the dock. On the new one you also have to use the new TC's which are double the price of the older version. Use my lens on a Canon 7Dll and a 5Dlll with a gimbal on tripod.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

CHG_CANON wrote:

As money seems to not be an object, go with the 5DIV and a 100-400L II with a 1.4x III for your long distance outdoor needs. The Canon lens extended will still outperform the Sigma.

I agree with the Canon lens quality but I assume the hockey is INDOORS so he does probably need the 2.8.
Maybe he should get a used 70-200 2.8 mkll or even a mkl and with the higher mp of the 5DmklV he can crop the shorter lens much deeper to get extra reach?!
SS

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

CHG_CANON wrote:

As money seems to not be an object, go with the 5DIV and a 100-400L II with a 1.4x III for your long distance outdoor needs. The Canon lens extended will still outperform the Sigma.

This is what I have and it works well.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Curious about the "2.8 for sports" comment.
--Bob

Idaho wrote:

You'll need to stay with a 2.8 lens for sports and a zoom range that allows you to use just one lens most of the time. The 1.4 tc is out. You'll want the camera that can give you the best results with high ISO settings and meet your focusing requirements for sports action. This means the most expensive body you can justify. If you can't justify the cost of what you would like to have - just buy it anyway.