Sigma 500mm F4.5 or Canon 300mm F2.8 IS

bren-escape

bren-escape

Messages
394
Edit My Images
No
Apologies in advance as there seems to be quite a few similar threads at the moment, but I have narrowed my choice down to these two.

A bit og back ground, at present I have a Sigma 50-500, which I have had for about 6-7 years, but I have not used it for over a year since buying a canon 400mm F5.6L. I love this later lens, but would like something better for poorer light and something longer. I mainly photograph birds and wildlife.

My main question is which would give better quality the sigma at 500mm or the canon with the extender.

I cant afford to buy new or go for the canon 500mm F2.8.

Your thoughts or experience is greatly appreciated.
 
The 300 2.8 will take both extenders exceedingly well so that'd be a no brainer for me, much more flexible than the Sigma with the added bonus of IS.

Not sure what the Canon 500 2.8 is you mention though ;)
 
Thanks, my mistake - I meant F4;)

Is the IS worth it? You can pick up older canon F2.8 lenses without the IS a few hundred pounds cheaper.
 
bren-escape said:
Thanks, my mistake - I meant F4;)

Is the IS worth it? You can pick up older canon F2.8 lenses without the IS a few hundred pounds cheaper.
Click to expand...

Yes, but can you get them repaired ?
Something to watch out for. Canon cannot repair (none or limited parts)
for pre IS 300m F2.8 lens.

C
 
I moved from the 400/5.6 to the 300/2.8 about nine months ago and have not regretted it one bit. I loved the 400/5.6 but the 300/2.8 is in a different league (which you would expect from the price difference).
The 300 is stunning at 300 of course, very very good at 420/4 (better than the bare 400/5.6 IMO) what surprised me most was just how good the 300 is at 600/5.6 - far exceeded my expectations.

HERE is a link to some samples I have taken with the 300/2.8 plus both 1.4 and 2x tc's which may help.
I have even taken some very reasonable shots with stacked 1.4 and 2x tc's (840/8) but you do need good light and a good tripod/head.
 
Ceejay - Good point thankyou.

Roy - It was your pics, particularly the Dartford Warbler one that has got me looking at this combo:thumbs: Results do look great. Can I ask were they on a tripod and were you in a hide or walking round?

Thanks for replies.
 
bren-escape said:
Ceejay - Good point thankyou.

Roy - It was your pics, particularly the Dartford Warbler one that has got me looking at this combo:thumbs: Results do look great. Can I ask were they on a tripod and were you in a hide or walking round?

Thanks for replies.
Click to expand...
I know of several people who use the combo with the 2x hand held and get very good results - I hand hold it sometimes but prefer to use a tripod when I have the 2x on board (I am a weakling OAP :lol:). I also use a monopod at times. With the 1.4x I more often than not use hand held.
I do not use hides or even managed reserves but just go walkabout for my pics (which is why I went for the 300/2.8 a opposed to the 500/4).
 
Thanks Roy, Just need to find one now at a reasonable price.

Whilst searching I found a Canon 400mm F2.8 secondhand at £3500 from a shop with warranty. Hmmm.....:cool:
 
Roy C said:
I know of several people who use the combo with the 2x hand held and get very good results - I hand hold it sometimes but prefer to use a tripod when I have the 2x on board (I am a weakling OAP :lol:). I also use a monopod at times. With the 1.4x I more often than not use hand held.
I do not use hides or even managed reserves but just go walkabout for my pics (which is why I went for the 300/2.8 a opposed to the 500/4).
Click to expand...

Roy - thanks I have been persuaded and bought one now. I understand it is very sharp, do you still stop it down? do you stop it down with convertors attached?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top