Sigma or Canon

Ruud G.

Hello,
I am rather new on this forum so maybe the questions has already been asked several times. If so.....I'm sorry. But anyway, I want to buy another camera extra and also a lens because when we are in Africa on safari both my wife and I like to make a lot of pictures. Now I have a Canon 20D with a Canon 100-400. I think it's a beautifull lens but maybe I want to buy a Sigma 50-500 extra.:dunno
What's your opinion about this lens or is it better to buy another 100-400.....


Thansk a lot
Ruud

iceman17

Hi Ruud,Im using the Sigma 50-500mm lens and love it.Its heavy and light hungry but performs very well under the right conditionsHere are three examples of what it can do.From one extreme to the other and something in between.These were taken using a Nikon D70,hope this helps...Mike

dfdems

If youre buying a second lense I would say go for the 50-500. Why limit yourself with two of the same lenses?

Khaos

You best have a monopod. They don't call it the Bigma for no reason.

RickP66

I'd reccommend getting the Canon 400mm f5.6L as a change of pace from the 100-400. It's tack sharp and light enough to hand-hold.

wburychka

Ruud G. wrote:

Hello,
I am rather new on this forum so maybe the questions has already been asked several times. If so.....I'm sorry. But anyway, I want to buy another camera extra and also a lens because when we are in Africa on safari both my wife and I like to make a lot of pictures. Now I have a Canon 20D with a Canon 100-400. I think it's a beautifull lens but maybe I want to buy a Sigma 50-500 extra.
What's your opinion about this lens or is it better to buy another 100-400.....

Thansk a lot
Ruud

If you've got the muscle for it, Bigma is probably the best value in lenses today. At 500mm and F7.1 or higher, its quality is frankly amazing. And you're getting this from someone who owns Bigma, the Canon 100-400LIS, and Canon 500mm F4LIS. I've also used the 400mm F5.6, and in all honesty, I don't see the appeal of that lens. It weighs only 4 oz. less than the 100-400, it has no IS, and it cannot zoom back. A friend of mine INSISTED that I try it out, so I did. I cannot imagine buying the 400mm over the 100-400. If you already have a 100-400 and don't want to spend $5,500 for the 500mm F4LIS, then Bigma is a great value. At 4.8 lbs, it is a bit of a workout for handheld, but it is an extraordinary zoom. I bought it for the 500mm, but the ability to zoom back to 50mm for location or the big picture is wonderful. With extension tubes, it makes a really decent semimacro, too. Great for dragonflies, big spiders, etc.

Go for it. Any serious amateur should own a Bigma. Another plus. With the STANDARD Tamron 1.4x converter, you retain autofocus (in good light), so you have a 700mm F9 with autofocus. You can't beat that!

RickP66

wburychka wrote:

I've also used the 400mm F5.6, and in all honesty, I don't see the appeal of that lens. It weighs only 4 oz. less than the 100-400, it has no IS, and it cannot zoom back. A friend of mine INSISTED that I try it out, so I did. I cannot imagine buying the 400mm over the 100-400.

Then you didn't give it enough of a chance. The fact is, the vast majority of the time, you won't be using the 100-399 range of the 100-400. Add to that the fact that the 400 is incredibly sharp, has great contrast and focusses very very fast, and it's very easy to see the appeal of this lens. I've used mine for months now and I wouldn't consider getting rid of it even if I bought the 100-400. It gets used more than any other lens I own. I used to own a Bigma, but the 400 replaced it and is MUCH more useful and versatile. The 50-500 is nearly impossible to use hand-held, while the 400 is very easy to hand-hold. The 50-500 is awkwardly balanced when fully extended and is very very slow at 500.