A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Canon EOS > EOS Lenses > New Sigma 50-500 or Canon...

Featured Equipment Deals

Introduction to Lightroom: Importing Images (Video Tutorial) Read More

Introduction to Lightroom: Importing Images (Video Tutorial)

Learn the basics of importing your images to Lightroom, from how you'd like to view your images to how to add a copyright to your metadata.

Latest Equipment Articles

Choosing a Mobile Photo Printer Read More

Choosing a Mobile Photo Printer

In today's mobile, digital world, we carry hundreds or even thousands of pictures around on our smartphones and tablets. Tom Persinger looks at 4 different mobile photo printer options for getting...

Latest Learning Articles

Advanced Printing with Lightroom (Video Tutorial) Read More

Advanced Printing with Lightroom (Video Tutorial)

Building upon last week's Basic Printing with Lightroom video tutorial, this advanced printing tutorial will teach you to print contact sheets, print multiple images at a time, use Lightroom's present...


New Sigma 50-500 or Canon 100-400 lens

Responses


First     Prev     1   |   2    

Mike Hitchen , Feb 23, 2010; 06:12 a.m.

@Jake Cole:

The OP is using a cropped-sensor so the 100-400mm does give enough reach for wildlife

What does the crop sensor have to do with reach...?

Daniel Charette , Feb 23, 2010; 07:29 a.m.

"While the lens is, in fact, f6.3 what is reported to the body is f5.6 so AF will work."
Well then, I was wrong! Sorry about that.
The version I have (Olympus Mount) would AF at 6.3 but under the best lighting conditions only. I always thought that since only the 1 series will AF above 5.6, that woudn't work out.
I always considered the BIGMA as a good, sharp lens but didn't buy the Canon mount version because of the limitation I thought it had. An American fellow (from Florida) that came by our neck of the woods (Canada) had a hard time focusing with is BIGMA on a 1 series Canon body in fairly good light and so I had reached that conclusion.
I had never read anything about this before.

Paul Russell , Feb 23, 2010; 08:15 a.m.

The exsisting bigma works on my 400D (XTi) 7D, 300x (35mm rebel k2 i think) and 3.
It's better stopped down to f8 at 500mm, but this is more down to the very narrow depth of field, especially at closer focusing distances (I do birding from a hide) folk tend to assume that a cameras AF system will stop working at anything above f5.6 if thats all the AF system is rated to, if the light is nice and parrallel (as with a super telephoto lens like this) then it isn't as much of an issue.
How beneficial is OS? With this lens you are going to need a tripod anyway... It's not light, compact or hand-holdable.
How does it compare to the Canon 100-400? I don't know. When I bought mine (before Sigmas price hike) It should have been 2/3rd of the price of the canon, in actual fact I got it for just over half.
They are selling used now for more than what I bought mine new for (same with the 12-24!)
I am thinking of selling mine and getting a 70-200 f2.8 non IS and tele setup, mainly because I don;t use the 500 nearly as much as I thought I would, and the zoom range at f2.8 would be more useful (I use the bigma alongside a 200mm f2.8 which I'll also sell) but to be honest I want for nothing in terms of IQ with the Bigma.
For the record, it's got blazing fast AF on the 7D.

Hadi Khademi , Feb 23, 2010; 09:39 a.m.

A lot of good rersponses which I truly appreciate. Now I have a better understanding for decision making. Based on the discussion I have read, there are a couple of things which to me look like the center issues:

  • The debate on using Canon 100-400 and cropping the image or using Sigma 50-500 and using the entire frame (both in the longest focal length). I think the answer would be doing a side-by-side comparison in a variety of ISO and shutter/aperture combinations and arriving at a conclusion.
  • Auto Focus issue of Bigma. Based on what I have read in this tread, I think this deserves a closer look, because as great and convenient is the Sigma's 10X zoom range, at the end of the day focus is of paramount importance. Again a quantitative comparison would help users like me to make informed decisions.

The only issue I personally have with cropping the images is the fact that its not the original composition anymore! By cropping you are recomposing the image and to some extent it counters the photographer's original thought of the composition in the filed. I know some of you guys are very skilled in recomposing the images in post processing and get it just right, but may be I am a bit philosophical about it and plainly don't like it! It would be nice if I can get it right in the first place.

Hadi Khademi , Feb 23, 2010; 09:40 a.m.

Sorry double posting!

Jake Cole , Feb 23, 2010; 01:56 p.m.

@Jake Cole:

The OP is using a cropped-sensor so the 100-400mm does give enough reach for wildlife

Mike Hitchen

What does the crop sensor have to do with reach...?

Equivalent angles of view at standard print sizes compared to standard 35mm which is the platform that the general commment 'you need at least 500mm for wildlife' is based. Not arguing the truth of that statement, but responding on the relative merits of whether the 100-400mm lens has enough reach on the OP's cropped sensor to generally be considered suitable for a wide range of wildlife images given some general industry suggestions.
Hadi Khademi

The only issue I personally have with cropping the images is the fact that its not the original composition...

While that is true, from your given position though with a longer lens you would also have a different composition. If you like your original composition then there is no need to crop. If you wished the shot was tighter and the subject was larger in the frame, then cropping a well exposed picture to 80% would often be very acceptable depending on the desired final image print size. However, the lenses being discussed are not the top grade so of course avoid cropping when you can. You may never NEED to crop, only if you wanted to make the 400mm lens have the same view as the 500mm lens, and who knows if you would ever want to do that, or would need to do that very often.

Mark Ethridge , Feb 23, 2010; 02:06 p.m.

Particularly with wildlife photography, it is often difficult just to get the subject on frame and in focus. I don't see why cropping the image for composition would bother anyone, but to each his own. Of course, if you can compose the full frame, then you might also consider composing the shot with the crop in mind. Otherwise, you are limited by your focal length.

I haven't used the Bigma so I can't comment on it and I certainly can't comment on a lens that Sigma hasn't released yet, but I do own the 100-400. It is a terrific lens. Image quality is stellar and it focuses flawlessly on my XTi. IS makes it very easy to handhold in good light, too.

Mike Hitchen , Feb 24, 2010; 09:38 a.m.

Jake:

Equivalent angles of view at standard print sizes compared to standard 35mm which is the platform that the general commment 'you need at least 500mm for wildlife' is based. Not arguing the truth of that statement, but responding on the relative merits of whether the 100-400mm lens has enough reach on the OP's cropped sensor to generally be considered suitable for a wide range of wildlife images given some general industry suggestions.

Are you saying that a 500mm lens is used for reasons of angle of view? If you have the option for moving position when shooting a static subject (people, buildings etc) I would agree with you.
But I disagree for wildlife - a 500mm is preferred of a 400mm so you can get the biggest possible image projected onto the sensor. With wildlfe or sports photography you are often limited to shoting from a fixed position, with the subject some way off such that it is not frame-filling, and in this case you want the image to fill as much of the sensor as possible to reduce the amount of croping you need to do (especially birds in flight). The projected image will be the same size no matter what the sensor size so the main determinant is the focal length of the lens.


First     Prev     1   |   2    

Back to top

Notify me of Responses