should I swap out my lens (Page 2): Yes, 400mm is NOT enough FL for FF .......you could use a 1.4X with the 400 - IF this is the f5.6 400, much smaller/lighter/cheaper than a 150-600.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

hdfilmnoir wrote:

Well Hedgehogs, I know you get a lot of request about which lens to use and I always felt someone has the answer here or will a least point me in the right direction. I have an upcoming trip to Alaska and I was thinking of swapping out my Canon prime 400 mm lens for a Sigma 105-600. I love the canon but I was wondering if I will get the reach I'm looking for. Think Beers and moose is what I'm looking for. I would mount this on my Canon r5.

Thank All!
hd

Yes, 400mm is NOT enough FL for FF .......you could use a 1.4X with the 400 - IF this is the f5.6 400, much smaller/lighter/cheaper than a 150-600. And/or Plan on cropping and using pixel enlargement software....

If cropping and using pixel enlargement, make sure you optimize/minimize any blurring as the burring will be exacerbated !

GLSmith Loc: Tampa, Fl

On trips to Alaska, I've started shooting bears 150 yards away with what I had a 300 mm, but I've also had bears as close as 75-100 feet..go with what you feel comfortable with

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

hdfilmnoir wrote:

Well Hedgehogs, I know you get a lot of request about which lens to use and I always felt someone has the answer here or will a least point me in the right direction. I have an upcoming trip to Alaska and I was thinking of swapping out my Canon prime 400 mm lens for a Sigma 105-600. I love the canon but I was wondering if I will get the reach I'm looking for. Think Beers and moose is what I'm looking for. I would mount this on my Canon r5.

Thank All!
hd

On most tours you will not get much opportunity to shoot beers(really, your going to a bar to shoot beers) and Moose. You are limiting yourself to very few opportunities by your lens choice. When I went I took my 28-300 zoom and my pocket Sony XH99 which has a 24-720mm zoom.
Please check with your tour provider to see how much opportunity you will have to shoot beers? and Moose.
Not much I suspect.
Please consider taking a wider angle lens and their will be much more opportunity for you than just beers and Moose.

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

CHG_CANON wrote:

Your EOS R5 can handle the 400 f/5.6L with either the 1.4x or 2x EF extenders and retain AF. These would be better and cheaper choices. You're also shooting with 45MP where 400mm may be long enough to just crop from the results.

45MP makes a big difference!

bwa

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

I own the Sigma 150-600mm C and with the ef-rf adapter, mount it on a R5. Given the opportunity for such an adventure, I think I’d forgo my lens and rent a 400 or longer prime and a 1.4 or 2.0 TC. And I’d bring along a 24-70 or 24-105.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

hdfilmnoir wrote:

Well Hedgehogs, I know you get a lot of request about which lens to use and I always felt someone has the answer here or will a least point me in the right direction. I have an upcoming trip to Alaska and I was thinking of swapping out my Canon prime 400 mm lens for a Sigma 105-600. I love the canon but I was wondering if I will get the reach I'm looking for. Think Beers and moose is what I'm looking for. I would mount this on my Canon r5.

Thank All!
hd

24-105 and the Canon 800mm f11.

clickety

CHG_CANON wrote:

Your EOS R5 can handle the 400 f/5.6L with either the 1.4x or 2x EF extenders and retain AF. These would be better and cheaper choices. You're also shooting with 45MP where 400mm may be long enough to just crop from the results.

👍👍

epd1947

hdfilmnoir wrote:

Well Hedgehogs, I know you get a lot of request about which lens to use and I always felt someone has the answer here or will a least point me in the right direction. I have an upcoming trip to Alaska and I was thinking of swapping out my Canon prime 400 mm lens for a Sigma 105-600. I love the canon but I was wondering if I will get the reach I'm looking for. Think Beers and moose is what I'm looking for. I would mount this on my Canon r5.

Thank All!
hd

You might give thought to your use of the lens beyond this one trip - other than the Alaska trip it doesn’t sound to me like you would be replacing your Canon 400mm which I gather has served you well? Is there a dedicated teleconverter (1.4x) that you could add to your present kit? Your R5 also has a lot of resolution- so shooting at 400mm and cropping somewhat in post to tighten up your composition might also be an approach.

hdfilmnoir Loc: New Mexico

thanks all, I'm not made of money so I'm going to go with the doubler.

nervous2 Loc: Provo, Utah

PHRubin wrote:

I know of 3 150-600 lenses. I think you would be happy with the change. which of the Sigma are you contemplating? I chose the Tamron G2.

I too chose the Tamron G2 after a lot of research. Very happy with it.

JimBart Loc: Western Michigan

What about a 1.4 or 2. Extender unless you have greater uses for a new lens. I currently use the sigma 150/600 contemporary with no problems

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

hdfilmnoir wrote:

Well Hedgehogs, I know you get a lot of request about which lens to use and I always felt someone has the answer here or will a least point me in the right direction. I have an upcoming trip to Alaska and I was thinking of swapping out my Canon prime 400 mm lens for a Sigma 105-600. I love the canon but I was wondering if I will get the reach I'm looking for. Think Beers and moose is what I'm looking for. I would mount this on my Canon r5.

Thank All!
hd

"Beers and moose"?

RENT or buy the Canon RF 100-500mm for your trip! You also might want an RF 1.4X. With that you'll have up to 700mm.

Third party lenses like the Sigma 150-600mm are not yet made in RF mount, so you will need to adapt. SOME 3rd party 150-600mm don't work well adapted... I'm not sure if it was Tamron or Sigma.

Even assuming the 3rd party 150-600mm adapts and works, it's a sure thing that the Canon RF 100-500mm is superior in every way. For one you get benefit of IS in the lens and IBIS in the camera working together. That's only possible with Canon RF lenses. Adapted lenses have to either use their own IS or the IBIS, but not both. You MIGHT get 3 stops worth of assistance out of the IS in the adapted lens or the IBIS... whereas the 100-500mm itself offers 5 stops with it's newer IS system, plus another 2 or 3 working with your camera's IBIS. The Canon lens is also a bit smaller and about 1 lb. lighter weight (compared to the Sigma "C"...not the heavier "S").

CamB Loc: Juneau, Alaska

jerryc41 wrote:

I always prefer a zoom to a fixed tele. Will 400mm be too short or too long? Yes, it will. A 105-600mm lens will give you much more leeway in framing a shot.

"Think Beers and moose is what I'm looking for." You'll probably find moose, but I doubt you'll find many beers in the Alaskan wilderness.

There is lots of beer in the Alaska wilderness. Almost as important as a gun.

RightOnPhotography Loc: Quebec,QC

I have Nikon Z7 and use Tamron 100-400 f/4.5-6.3 Di VC USD Lens for birds and wildlife. It is much lighter than 150-600mm so I am able to handhold it. Sometimes, when I need longer than 400mm, I switch the camera into DX mode, which gives me 600mm at 20Mp. The image quality in DX mode is quite good, it's as good as in FF mode at 45Mp. Just a thought.

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

amfoto1 wrote:

Third party lenses like the Sigma 150-600mm are not yet made in RF mount, so you will need to adapt. SOME 3rd party 150-600mm don't work well adapted... I'm not sure if it was Tamron or Sigma.

I use the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary with a Canon R5 and the EF-RF adapter without any issues whatsoever. I also occasionally use the Sigma TC-1401 (a 1.4x teleconverter) with the same combination, but it does soften the image a bit.