Steve'sDigicams

JohnG · Sep 23, 2009, 6:59 PM

The 70-300 IS USM will be a step up. It's sharper and faster to focus although still not as fast as the L lenses or even Sigma's HSM lenses. That sells for around $580.
Next step up the chain is the sigma 100-300 F4 HSM for about $1000
Up from that is the 100-400L at $1700.

Another possibility is the sigma 50-500 (aka Bigma) which also sells for around $1000. Not as sharp as the 100-300 and an f5.6 lens. But plenty of reach.

I'd stay away from Tamron or Tokina as they're simply too slow to focus so not well suited for sports use.

timnichol · Sep 24, 2009, 1:43 PM

thanks for the advice John.
I have a sigma 50-150 f2.8 for shooting indoor volleyball pics and works great. I was considering getting the teleconverter for it. Maybe the 2x. Any thoughts?

JohnG · Sep 24, 2009, 2:33 PM

I'm not all that familiar with the 50-150. But I'd hesitate to recommend a 2x TC for it. There are a few lenses where 2x works OK but those tend to be the best primes. Even then a lot of folks don't like the results. Based on comments I've seen from others using other lenses I would expect focus performance to be poor, bokeh to be a bit unpleasant etc. 1.4x TCs are usually OK in a lens in the same class as the 50-150, but I haven't seen too many sports photogs favor a 2x TC on any zoom lens and few that seem to like it on aa lens as good as the Canon 300mm 2.8. But I'm voicing this opinion only based upon other's comments on the subject. I try not to use my 1.4x TC very much as I don't like the results.

timnichol · Sep 24, 2009, 4:39 PM

yeah,
that's what I seem to be reading too. Just a thought. Well, if I can get my focusing issue under control I should be doing much better

Steve'sDigicams

Recent Camera Reviews

Most Active Forums

Most Popular Deals

Latest Feature Articles

Sep 23, 2009, 6:59 PM	#11
JohnG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 5,949	The 70-300 IS USM will be a step up. It's sharper and faster to focus although still not as fast as the L lenses or even Sigma's HSM lenses. That sells for around $580. Next step up the chain is the sigma 100-300 F4 HSM for about $1000 Up from that is the 100-400L at $1700. Another possibility is the sigma 50-500 (aka Bigma) which also sells for around $1000. Not as sharp as the 100-300 and an f5.6 lens. But plenty of reach. I'd stay away from Tamron or Tokina as they're simply too slow to focus so not well suited for sports use.

Sep 24, 2009, 1:43 PM	#12
timnichol Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 6	thanks for the advice John. I have a sigma 50-150 f2.8 for shooting indoor volleyball pics and works great. I was considering getting the teleconverter for it. Maybe the 2x. Any thoughts?

Sep 24, 2009, 2:33 PM	#13
JohnG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 5,949	I'm not all that familiar with the 50-150. But I'd hesitate to recommend a 2x TC for it. There are a few lenses where 2x works OK but those tend to be the best primes. Even then a lot of folks don't like the results. Based on comments I've seen from others using other lenses I would expect focus performance to be poor, bokeh to be a bit unpleasant etc. 1.4x TCs are usually OK in a lens in the same class as the 50-150, but I haven't seen too many sports photogs favor a 2x TC on any zoom lens and few that seem to like it on aa lens as good as the Canon 300mm 2.8. But I'm voicing this opinion only based upon other's comments on the subject. I try not to use my 1.4x TC very much as I don't like the results.

Sep 24, 2009, 4:39 PM	#14
timnichol Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 6	yeah, that's what I seem to be reading too. Just a thought. Well, if I can get my focusing issue under control I should be doing much better