ZOOM lens ? Canon vs. Sigma

BLUEThunder

Hey Folks,
You all were VERY helpful to me when I was looking for a lens for indoor volleyball shooting. I appreciate that and am happy with what I ended up with per your recommendations.

I am now in the market for another lens and would love some input. I am looking for a fairly large zoom for 1) Wildlife 2) Outdoor sports, in particular MX racing and super bikes. 3) Beach life photography - people and creatures particuarily

All I have right now is a 70-300 kit lens that came with my daughters old film rebel. It is ok, but not what I want.

I am comparing the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS to the Sigma 120-400mm f/4.5-5.6 DG OS HSM APO. There is about a $500 price difference. WOW!!!

Is the Canon worth the extra dough? The big problem with the Sigma is that it is not available to B&H to ship for 2 weeks and I need it for a big AMA National MX race at Budds Creek,MD on July 13-14. I'm afraid I won't get it in time.

What is your advice on these two lenses? I do want a zoom, not a fixed. This will be used in some lower light situations with the wildlife photography. I'm open!

darkdragon

Well, from what I understand the Canon will be faster to auto-focus. That could be the difference between getting the shot and getting a big colorful blur in the MX races.

However, i have not used either one. I'm not a fan of pump action zooms which is why I didn't get a Canon 100-400. I don't have any experiance with the Sigma, I have a 170-500 but haven't taken it out for any real action yet.

You could rent from borrowlenses.com to try out the sigma for your shoot - also Amazon.com has that lens in stock and if you don't like it you can return for a full refund :-)

EDIT: borrowlenses doesn't have that Sigma. They do have another option though Tamron 200-500mm, but it won't be in until July

cmason

Check out these comparisons, and judge for yourself. Generally, Canon L lenses win in terms of quality, build and image quality, with Sigma not far behind, and the value offering if you don't pixel peep. That being said, you won't find many people sorry they bought an L lens.

Sigma 50-150 vs Canon 70-200 f4IS vs Canon 70-200 f2.8IS

Canon 70-200 f4 L USM
Canon 70-200 f2.8 L IS USM
Canon 100-400 f4.5-5.6 L IS USM
Canon 300 f4 L IS USM
Sigma 100-300 f4 EX DG HSM Link

http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/lenstests

Firetreee

Canon 100-400
The Canon is light weight and alwows me to keep a ready 40D on the front seat with a fair amount of reach. Tack sharp and easy to use, but you may need to send it out a couple times a year for cleaning, espesially considering the ways you plan to use it. Sample below

Tee Why

I've used both and wasn't impressed by the sigma.
The AF was a bit slower and the OS needed about a second or even more to settle in. The shooter that bought it didn't like the AF accuracy and speed and sold it. I took some shots at 400mm and wasn't particularly impressed by the lack of contrast.

There has been a mixed review of the lens from forum posters. Some getting great results, some not so. So until some formal tests are done, I guess the jury is out.

The Canon is a well known entity with a faster AF system and an IS that seems to settle in faster as well. I think the optics are very good as well (not excellent as in primes but very good).

Photoskipper

100-400 L Is
I vote for this lens.
It seems this lens suit your need.
Ideally, the more expensive 70-200 L F2.8 IS can do most of the job but just a bit too short for the use of wildlife. Add a 1.4X TC later so that it becomes 110 to 280 mm and effective focal lenght on the 1.6X body at 170 to 450 at F4 with IS for birds.

BLUEThunder

Firetreee wrote:

you may need to send it out a couple times a year for cleaning, espesially considering the ways you plan to use it.

Yeah, that is one of my biggest worries. (The dust/dirt of MX) Where would you send one for cleaning? How costly is that?

My son was riding/practicing MX last weekend at a local track and I wanted to photograph but it was entirely to dusty so I left the canon in the truck.

Oh, BTW, nice bird shot!

BLUEThunder

Another question?????
How about lens durability? I like to occasionally rock climb/rappel and hang from the side of a cliff to photograph climbers too. How are either of these lenses as far as an occasional ding against the rocks? I obviously try to protect it as much as possible, but, stuff happens.

So far it looks like you all are guiding me toward the Canon lens....

Tee Why

Canon L lenses are built as tough as they come. Sigma is pretty good as well, but if I'm trekking with the lens and it can get banged around, I'd probably go with an L lens.

Looks like the first online formal test is up.
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1184/cat/31

BLUEThunder

Well, I did it!! I bit the bullet....
Well, yeeee hah! I ordered the big boy! The Canon 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS USM!!!!

Dang, that one's gonna hit the ol' checkbook hard. Anywho, after extensive research on the ol' web I decided on the Canon. Doesn't sound as if I will be dissapointed.

I went ahead and ordered a canon monopod too. It should arrive Thursday....just in time for the 4th of July festivities! I can't wait. I will try to post some of the results....

20DNoob

Congrats on the new glass!

One thing I'd be concerned about is the monopod. You may want to think about returning it and getting something a bit more sturdy, as your rapidly approaching the "Approx." 4.4lb load capacity. Especially since your putting 2+ grand worth of gear on it I'd spent an extra $20-$30 on a 679B to future proof the set-up.

Then again I like to err more and more on the side of caution the older I get.

BLUEThunder

20DNoob wrote:

Congrats on the new glass!

One thing I'd be concerned about is the monopod. You may want to think about returning it and getting something a bit more sturdy, as your rapidly approaching the "Approx." 4.4lb load capacity. Especially since your putting 2+ grand worth of gear on it I'd spent an extra $20-$30 on a 679B to future proof the set-up.

Then again I like to err more and more on the side of caution the older I get.

Thanks for the advice Noob. I did not put much research at all into the monopod. I will consider that.

I am really anxious to use the new glass.

darkdragon

BLUEThunder wrote:

Thanks for the advice Noob. I did not put much research at all into the monopod. I will consider that.

I am really anxious to use the new glass.

Well, just to note I use a $20 monopod (from wal-mart) with a Manfrottos Swivel Tilt head/quck release. I use it for photographing sports with a 70-200 2.8L + 2xTC with no issues (thats on a 40D w/battery grip). I also use the same monopod for shooting video with a Canon GL1 video camera (larger than a consumer camera).

When I upgrade my monopod I'll be going to the manfrotto 560B which is just a great pod all around.

20DNoob

darkdragon wrote:

Well, just to note I use a $20 monopod (from wal-mart) with a Manfrottos Swivel Tilt head/quck release. I use it for photographing sports with a 70-200 2.8L + 2xTC with no issues (thats on a 40D w/battery grip). I also use the same monopod for shooting video with a Canon GL1 video camera (larger than a consumer camera).

When I upgrade my monopod I'll be going to the manfrotto 560B which is just a great pod all around.

If your set-up works for you and your comfortable with the risk than rock on. I was just trying to say to the OP why take the chance on a cheapie, instead spend a tiny bit extra and have the security in the future to use bigger glass if the OP goes that way.

Not for nothing, the GL1 is just a hair lighter than the 70-200 2.8 by itself according to the spec sheets so I'm not to sure where your going with that.

darkdragon

20DNoob wrote:

If your set-up works for you and your comfortable with the risk than rock on. I was just trying to say to the OP why take the chance on a cheapie, instead spend a tiny bit extra and have the security in the future to use bigger glass if the OP goes that way.

Not for nothing, the GL1 is just a hair lighter than the 70-200 2.8 by itself according to the spec sheets so I'm not to sure where your going with that.

Thats true. Personally, I'm not sure what the risk is - unless you are trying to put 20lbs on a 5lb load-safe pod. Then at that point, I'd think the big problem would be with the mount point (the quick release or head) damaging the camera's mount point.

Anyway, I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, just giving the OP my own opinion also. Just like everyone is. GL1 is pretty light, that is true (but add battery, tape, mattbox, wide angle adapter, etc). Anyway, straying off the point here.

The point is that the pod you suggested is nice, but I thought the OP might want to look into other options like the 560B and the swivel/tilt head. Also so that the OP doesn't think there is a huge rush to go get a fancy new pod just to do test shots and the like.

Photoskipper

darkdragon wrote:

Thats true. Personally, I'm not sure what the risk is - unless you are trying to put 20lbs on a 5lb load-safe pod. Then at that point, I'd think the big problem would be with the mount point (the quick release or head) damaging the camera's mount point.

Anyway, I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, just giving the OP my own opinion also. Just like everyone is. GL1 is pretty light, that is true (but add battery, tape, mattbox, wide angle adapter, etc). Anyway, straying off the point here.

The point is that the pod you suggested is nice, but I thought the OP might want to look into other options like the 560B and the swivel/tilt head. Also so that the OP doesn't think there is a huge rush to go get a fancy new pod just to do test shots and the like.

We usually use the monopod to support part of the weight of the heavy lens. Our hands still holding both the camera body and the lens. It should not be too much stress on the head and the pod.

It may be different for the tripod. It is recommended to load only half the weight to the rated loading, such as only 5 kg equipment on a 10 kg rated tripod to play safe.

many of the consumer grade tripods have no rating. I don't have confidence to put the expensive toys on it.

darkdragon

Photoskipper wrote:

many of the consumer grade tripods have no rating. I don't have confidence to put the expensive toys on it.

That's true. I only use pro video and photo tripods for my gear. I use the cheap tripods to hold reflectors and junk.

20DNoob

NP DD, I'm not looking for one. Although I do come off that way at times so I try not to post to much.

I've come to the mindset of just buying things once since I started into this hobby. Because I tried to save money initially when I started to have extra for the bits and baubs I've somehow managed to end up with 4 mono pods and 3 tripods.

When I started out I never thought I'd have the gear I currently do, let alone what I plan on getting in the future, because of that I once again must purchase yet another tripod and head.

Not to TJ but since we're all here does anyone know of a CF tripod that'll support 20+lbs.(preferably 25) that has flip lever locks(I hate those twist locks)? If one exists I'd rather keep it under/around $500 if at all possible.

Thanks.