Sigma 120-300 2.8 S with TC's or Canon 200-400 F4

BennyBoo

BennyBoo

Messages
803
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm asking for my step dad here..

He takes people for trips out to foreign lands like Brazil, Ecuador and Australia, mainly bird spotting with abit of wild animals/big cats..

He's got a trusty 60D, a 7D mki and Canon 100-400 L IS and has his eyes set on the new 200-400.. He also wants a 5Diii.

Ive said about the new Sigma Sports and the new Teleconverters coming and he could get the 5Diii for under the price of the Canon 200-400..

Does anyone have experience with either or both..!?

Thanks in advanced!
 
For what he's shooting I'd think a 7D Mk2 would be better than a 5D Mk3.

With a Canon 200-400 1.4x retailing for about £8,800 (WEX price) he could get a 5D Mk3 and a few Sigma lenses and teleconvertors for less than that.
 
Don't get me wrong, the likes of Andy Rouse and others have raved about the canon 200-400mm f4 lens, but it has a serious price tag, I would love one if I was spending someone else's money, but there are much more affordable options as Neil has said.
 
I've read that the Sigma performs well with a x2 giving you a 240 - 600/5.6 for an amazing price but I would also advocate staying in the crop camp for what he shoots - go 7D2 rather than 5D3.

I too would be interested in actual experience on the board of this lens with various TC's. I shoot a bit of Ice Hockey here and there with a 70-200/2.8 on full frame and can't help but think that the 120-300 range would be perfect for that and with a 1.4 (perhaps the new one) I'll have a 168-420/4 for a bit of football too.
 
Thanks for all your replies guys!

I too have said to stay with crop, he doesn't really need the added cost of a FF body..

I dont think he'd get the results he's after with a 150-600.. I think he'd rather have the mid range of zoom with a nice aperture, with an added option of the long end with a TC, than a big lens like that..
Plus he's traveling for 2-3 sometimes 5 weeks at a time so weight comes in a little bit..

I will put forward our suggestions, see where he goes..

Pete, I'd quite happily have the 200-400 if someone else footed the bill! But I too, just thinks there better on the market for what he does for the cost of it.. I'm sure it's that price for a reason, I'm just not sure he'd use the full potential..
 
Last edited:
Not cheap options either way. Strongly advise he gets to try all side by side if possible, ie hire them. They all perform differently and are big and heavy, nothing like a Canon 100-400 - harder to use, and way more weight on a trek.

Also consider Canon 300/2.8 Mk2 plus extenders, on a 7DMk2.
 
I tried the 120-300mm F2.8 Sport with TCs but wasn't convinced so now I have the 200-400mm :/

The Sigma on it's own is great but the performance with TCs just wasn't up to what I wanted sadly! Shame since it would have saved me a fair amount of cash lol
 
The 200-400 is excellent, and surprisingly light too. I would recommend it over Sigma any day, and the 120-300 wont have as much reach obviously. If he can afford it get the Canon, and resale is likely to be very high too so he wont lose much if he sells.
 
Cant believe anyone would pay £9000 for an f/4 lens, the 120-300mm with a 1.4x extender is a superb combination in Nikon mount, cant see it being any worse in Canon mount
 
Plenty of people would that for an F4 lens and they have for very good reasons :)

Short answer =

If you want a good 300mm lens then buy the Sigma. If you want a good 200-560mm lens then buy the Canon

Long answer =

It all depends what you're after really. I also had 100-400mm before this and wanted a range and sharpness upgrade and AF speed too if possible. The Sigma is great if you're only looking for a 120-300mm F2.8 sport/wildlife lens but I found the performance with TCs rather mediocre. The quality seemed to drop off a fair bit but also the AF took a hit which was another big problem for me.

For me the 200-400mm is the ideal lens and there's nothing else out there that fills the same gap. If all you do is shoot birds than 500mm or 600mm primes will be better and there's other scenarios where a 400mm F2.8L would be better etc but if you do a bit of everything then this is the lens.

200mm to 560mm without having to drop the body off the lens and up to 784mm with another 1.4x converter and the quality is still pretty good. AF will only be in liveview or on bodies with F8 AF but the option to have close to 800mm with reasonable quality is still rather cool.
 
Sigma's new round of TC's are not out just yet. I'm hoping for better results with the new 120-300/2.8 S.
 
Aye there's a new firmware update for the 120-300mm sport for those TCs that will be out soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top