Sigma 100-300 or canon 300mm f4 l

Messages
492
Edit My Images
Yes
Torn between these two has anyone had or used both is there any great difference ? The canon non is version as it's more affordable, thanks guys
 
Think there are more than one sigma 100-300s,which one
 
I used the Sigma 100-300 f/4 EX for a number of years and it was a very good lens. If Canon made it, it would be an L.
I moved to the Canon 300 f/4 IS L and a 70-200L but miss the Sigma.

I moved over to Canon lenses as Canon Elstree is very prompt at servicing, whilst I was without a lens for 6 wks with Sigma, necessitating two hired lenses.

Would I recommend the lens - yes. Very good.
 
I owned the Canon for years, and my copy was showing its age. I bought the Sigma to replace the Canon but ended up selling it. The Canon was clearly better wide open, and especially with a 1.4x teleconverter. I also found the focusing more reliable on the Canon, not that the Sigma was bad. To be honest, the Sigma is a great lens and rationally may have been the sensible choice, but there was just something magical about the Canon. That lens was my biggest regret when I moved to micro 4/3. A couple of provisos:
- The above comments refer to the non IS version. A friend had the IS version and it wasn't quite as good wide open.
- Reports are that the Sigma has better bokeh (it wasn't a major consideration for me).
 
The main problem is finding one they seem hard to find will go for which I can find first at the right price and condition
 
I've not used the Sigma, but do have the Canon 300F4 (IS version) and am very pleased with it, I find mine quick to focus and accurate and would certainly recommend one.

Takes a 1.4TC very well as well if / when required.

The other thing I found when I first got it was it made me think about the shots differently - you can't zoom in / out at will, you needed to think about what did you want and what could you get - I would say, for me, it improved my photography...:)
 
Got the one from wex in the end lost out on the one on the bay but it would have cost another £90 and no guarantee mpb had one at another £124 but looks in poor condition if it's the right one as the description doesn't match picture, seems they have general descriptions - a bit off putting
 
Back
Top