Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM vs 120-400mm f/4.5-5.6 DG OS HSM

TheNissanMan

TheNissanMan

Messages
4,189
Name
Ryan
Edit My Images
Yes
I tend to buy lenses on the cuff rather than doing the research first which I know I shouldn't do!!!

When I first joined the forum the Sigma was highly recommended by numerous peeps on here as was the Canon but which is the better lens.

At the moment I tend to be shooting a bit of everything which doesn't help narrow down the 'best' lens for a purpose.

Tack season is starting so do do anticipate shooting more trackside stuff and seem to be shooting in places such as Marwell and Cotswlod wildlife park and out and about in the country so the extra reach may come in useful.

Is there anyone on here who has used both and could give the pro's and con's of each lens or is one simply better than the other ?
 
Ive had the 70-300 and it was a very good lens, needs stopping down slightly to get the best out of it. It hs been known as a "hidden L" not 100% sure i agree with that but a very good lens nonetheless.

Not had the 120-400 but the obvious advantage is the extra 100mm which could come in very handy.
 
I have the 70-300, don't know too much about the sigma...

I think you need to weigh up all the pro's and cons

size and weight (will you carry it or leave it at home)

Are you always struggling with not enough distance ?

Do you shoot birds and wildlife ?

is 120 (effective 192) too long at the short end ? how will you hold and support when shooting at the 400 ( effective 640) end?

It would be a good lens for wildlife and motorsport I would think...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top