Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 30, 2006, 1:30 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,105
Default

I know this question is rather repeating. I tried searching but coudnt find an appropriate answer.I am posting the question again.between sigma 100-300 + 1.4x tele and 50-500(bigma)i eliminated 100-400L when compared with 100-300.the reach of bigma is somewhat attractive. but 100-420 at 5.6 is somewhat attractive too.i will be losing 80mm if i buy sigma but for the quality of pictures i am seeing from others its worth it.again bigma produces enuff quality pics that i am torn in between.can somebody who bought either one of them in sucha a dilema help me out herei currently dont have the flexibility to get my altime fav 120-300 f2.8 How i wish i can buy this lens. Amazing at even 600mm(Ask NHL. He has some amazing, amazing shots out at 600MM).Vj
nymphetamine is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 30, 2006, 12:36 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
bobbyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
Default

If mainly for wilflife and birds, I will go with canon 400mm f5.6 prime. I don't care much for the numbers/graphs but the quality of this lens is superb. Really fast AF for flight shots. And putting cheap tamron 1.4xTC you are at 560mm. Way better quality, IMHO than Bigma.
bobbyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 31, 2006, 6:26 AM   #3
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

There's also the Tamron 200-500...

It's measured MTF's is quite similar to the 400L at 400mm but can go longer with no need for TC (and also lighter than the prime too):
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len..._563/index.htm
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...0_56/index.htm
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 31, 2006, 11:01 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
bobbyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
Default

NHL - I would be really interested in seeing some real world examples with the tamron. 100% crops would be nice.
bobbyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 31, 2006, 12:41 PM   #5
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

FYI - http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=20487592
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 31, 2006, 2:21 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,105
Default

damn i wish i won a jackpot to buy the 120-300. There is no other lens with such a flexibility.

i gues only the sigma has the HSM when compared to tamron. The MTFs do show the tramron is much sharper.

the only disadvantage i see on sigma 100-300 is that it wont extend beyond 420 with a 1.4X. But still at 400 its at 5.6 and delivers pretty sharp images(seen some here)

On an easy note, NHL always gives more problems when people are trying to decide with, new suggestions )

i am going to pick a lot(thats the only way i can decide)



Vj
nymphetamine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 31, 2006, 3:33 PM   #7
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

For what it's worth, here's my advice:

I'm not a fan of charts. In the end you're not producing a chart, you're producing a photograph. So, when taking advice on any equipment advice trust the people that have actually used the piece of gear for the purpose you want to use it for and are willing to show you galleries of results.

For wildlife especially, there seem to be quite a lot of folks on this forum and other forums that are very accomplished. If you can't find at least 2 people that have galleries worth of shots with a given lens that should tell you something. If you can, then you can look at a number of shots to decide for yourself if a particular piece of gear produces the quality of photo you're interested in for YOUR SPECIFIC SUBJECT MATTER..

It's in the actual use of gear that people learn things about lenses that charts can't tell you (suffers from purple fringing, hunts a lot in low light, history of QC issues, etc..)

Typically I've found the best advice from those rich souls out there fortunate enough to have used more than one of the lenses I'm considering: E.G. if deciding between a 100-400 and a 400 5.6 it's useful to listen to people who've shot with both.

You can also search on pbase for photos by lens but again you don't necessarily get the benefit of the first hand pros/cons of a given lens.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 31, 2006, 10:01 PM   #8
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

If you can forego the flexibility of a zoom, IMO the 400L is better than the 100-400L...

I have the 100-400L too and shoot quite a lot with it with good results, but again according to two well known review sites its MTF is not up there (and their results do correlate one another):
http://www.photodo.com/topic_74.html
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...6_is/index.htm


Also the images from Photosig are of better IQ than Pbase:
http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/browse?id=31032
http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/browse?id=35656
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2006, 1:16 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
bobbyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
Default

I also agree with JohnG. Most graphs don't tell what happens in the field. I have both 100-400L and 400mm prime and I see people telling how good prime are compared to the zooms. Well my zoom is plenty sharp and it is hard to find which shot is with what lens when you look at prints.

Here is what I found between the 2.

100-400L:

1. You can use it for lot more things than for wildlife & birds

2. Pump zoom is nice. A lot of people complain about it but I find it much easier & faster to operate than twist zoom

3. It is not a dust sucker like everyone would make you believe

4. It is not 400mm, only 380mm or a bit lower

5. Min. focussing distance is very nice feature for things like butterflies

6. Even though it has old IS, I don't see any difference in picture quality if I leave IS on when on tripod.

7. Can work with 1.4xTC (non-reporting) but AF is slow and you need very good light. Only good for stationary subjects like night herons etc.

8. It is not soft at 400mm, atleast not my copy

9. There is big quality variance in this lens. Some are soft wide open some are very good. Mine is bits oft at f5.6 but improves at f6.7.

400mm f5.6 prime;

1. Real fast AF. One of the best birds in flight lenses

2. Min focussing distance can be pain if bird lands too close, it happens

3. Wish it had IS. You (well atleast I) need tripod with it unless ss is high enough

4. Not much quality difference when using 1.4xTC

5. It is sharper at f5.6 than at f8. Don't ask me why.

6. feels much lighter than 100-400L even through they pretty close in weight

Here are some of my test shots. All taken in RAW and no pp, no sharpening at all, not even during RAW conversion





With 1.4xTC (cheap tamron)






bobbyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2006, 3:50 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

I would also throw out there that I would be suspect of MTF charts.
For example, from what I've read the ones on www.canoneos.com are calculated and not "real world". In other words, they are the best the lens can perform in theory, and not what an actual instance of the lens does (or even an average lens would do.)

I agree with the suggestion about looking at what people can do with it.

I have the 100-400 and it is a bit softer at 400, but is still quite good. I use it for birds/animals from boats and some flight shots.

If you got it, I would get it from somewhere that you can easily return it. It does suffer from variability in quality between instances... so if you get a dud, return it.

I know people who like the 50-500 quite a lot. I wouldn't want to hand-hold it, which you can do with the others you listed... but if you have enough light it does work well.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:43 AM.