Canon 300mm +1.4 v Sigma 150-500

dougan

dougan

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,398
Name
Dougie
Edit My Images
Yes
I have the latest version of the Sigma 150-500 and was wondering if the Canon 300mm f4L IS + Canon 1.4 Extender would give any worthwhile improvement on IQ. I realise it would be much the same f stop wise.
 
Hi,

I pondered both combinations prior to making my purchase.
I found an excellent site (but I can't remember where!) that allows you to compare samples of lenses, and lenses + TC with other lenses, as well as reading a LOT of reviews.

The two were actually quite comparable around the 400mm mark (top end of the 300mm + TC) but the sigma looked a little soft towards the 500mm end.
Does the Canon not give you a stop more? At what point does the sigma stop being 5.6? I am assuming its well before 420mm?

For me the right decision was the 300mm (yet to buy the 1.4x as I can't find one!) because I have the 70-200 range covered already, and the 300mm prime @ F/4 is just stunning, not something I would have got with the sigma.

I guess it comes down to what you use the sigma for... if you find you're shooting in the 400-500 then I would say that is the right choice for you, obviously if most of your shots are 300-400 then the canon could be better.

Do you use it below 300mm ?

They're the questions I would be asking myself, rather than the IQ as there isn't a HUGE difference if your sigma is a nice copy.


If you have a 1.4 or just want to try out the 300mm then let me know as I am only on East Dartmoor.
 
Great lens, was my main sport / aviation lens until I upgraded last year to the bigger brother. The f4 works very well with the canon 1.4x TC, but you do need the light to get the best from that combo.

300mm f4 with 1.4x TC
IMG_3850copy1.jpg


300mm f4 with 1.4x TC
IMG_4393copy2.jpg


300mm f4
IMG_3794_edited-2.jpg


300mm f4
IMG_2159_edited-2.jpg


300mm f4 with 1.4x TC
IMG_3362_edited-2.jpg


Great lens, works well with the 1.4x TC but to get the best you need the light conditions. The bird Fraternity really like the 400mm f5.6 and its a fast focusing sharp lens, but I've seen it struggle, especially with aircraft in gloomy light, the f4 does make a difference over the f5.6, both very good lenses and I've been impressed with the images from the sigma, however, the jury's still out on action shots that require high shutter speeds, unless the lights perfect, no been impressed with the motorsport or aviation shots, a tad soft, but as a wildlife lens, very good value for the money. Sigma 50-500mm is suppose to be the slightly better (sharper) lens.

Peter
 
Last edited:
I bought the canon 400 f5.6 for my 50d over the 300 as I needed the reach for windsurfing/surfing shots and love it, fast focus and super sharp and I only really have trouble when the light is so bad that it's hardly worth taking pictures anyway! I would love to have an f4 or f2.8 but thats not going to happen! Have a look here http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/forgotten-400.shtml
 
Last edited:
I often look longingly at the 300's, especially the 2.8 non is.

But I use the 150-500 exclusively for wildlife & virtually every time I need to zoom back & forth. I might be shooting small birds & then a woodpecker turns up or waiting for buzzards & deer stroll by. I'd have to have the tc attached all the time & wouldn't often be able to switch in time, or without disturbing the subject.

So, for the moment I'll be sticking with the Sigma. I bought a 7d & can now whack up the iso to help on dull days & that's definately extended my available shooting time/opportunities.

FWIW I've use the-digital-picture site to compare but their copy of the 150-500 is dire, making comparisons less useful IMO.
 
Thanks for the comments guys!

Would the Sigma 300mm 2.8f plus extenders that is in the classifieds be even better?
It's a non DG version, would this make any difference with a 60D?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top