What Lens?

[Gonefishin]

Hi All
I’m new to the Forum but not to the Mag.
My interests are sport and nature photography.
I have a couple of questions for you and would welcome you opinions

I’ve just upgraded my camera from a 350D to a 50D and find that my 100/300 lens that I bought aeons ago with my EOS10 film camera whilst OK on the 350D no longer cuts the mustard on the 50D.

I’mtherefor in the market for a new lens and can’t make up my mind between the Canon 100 / 400 L Series and the Sigma 120/400 APO (not EX) lenses.

The recent Sigma review in the mag made no mention of the apertures / focal lengths which provided the sharpest pictures.
I note that neither is the actual focal length used ever mentioned in published photo information, unless of course a prime lens is used, although this info is available in the meta-data..

With my existing lens I normally shoot at 300mm and f5.6 with ISO adjusted to allow the fastest speed that at least 2x the focal length in use.

What, if any, quality improvements can I expect from each of the lenses when used wide-open at 300mm and 400mm.

Before I splash the cash perhaps my old lens needs a touch of in camera focus adjustment– how do I go about this please

[matt wilson]

I love the 100 400 L series ...managed to get a second hand one for a good price.

Take a look in my gallery .The bird shots were taken with it .It was a dull day so I was forced to up the iso to around 800 but for a first go at tracking birds in flight I was chuffed and the portrait shot is pin sharp.

My L series is at it's best around f8 but opening it up fully does not show marked deterioration.It is very heavy though so take that into account .It balances the 50 d well when shooting but is a pain in the neck "literally" after a long day out.

Given canon's crop factor the 400 ml is fantastic for getting right in there.

[flake]

100 - 400mm IS L is a bit of an old lens with a first generation IS, at f/5.6 it's also very slow, new price is currently around £1200 The Sigma is less than half the price and again is a slow lens.

For wildlife and sport you ideall need as fast a lens as possible so here is a better alternative you might not have considered, the Sigma 120 - 300mm f/2.8 Incredibly shap lens capable of challenging the OEM's prime lenses (not quite as good though) and with the use of a teleconverter a 170 - 420mm f/4 or a 240 - 600mm f/5.6 This lens is the cheapest way to a 5 -600mm lens with working autofocus. up to 300mm it wll allow a massive 4 times as much light as the Canon 100 - 400mm allowing for much fast and accurate auto focus using the centre spot which the slower Canon cannot use.

Of course there's a bit of a problem, and that is the price - if you insist on new its £2k but second user you can get a good one for around £1K similar to the price of the Canon, but it's a much better lens!!

If you want to do the microadjuct on your lenses follow these instructions here

[Gonefishin]

Originally Posted by matt wilson

I love the 100 400 L series ...managed to get a second hand one for a good price.

Take a look in my gallery .The bird shots were taken with it .It was a dull day so I was forced to up the iso to around 800 but for a first go at tracking birds in flight I was chuffed and the portrait shot is pin sharp.

My L series is at it's best around f8 but opening it up fully does not show marked deterioration.It is very heavy though so take that into account .It balances the 50 d well when shooting but is a pain in the neck "literally" after a long day out.

Given canon's crop factor the 400 ml is fantastic for getting right in there.

Thanks Matt.
Lovely pics and as you say, very sharp.
I think the way the 50D handles noise at up to ISO 800, it compensates well for not having a fast lens.

[Gonefishin]

Originally Posted by flake

100 - 400mm IS L is a bit of an old lens with a first generation IS, at f/5.6 it's also very slow, new price is currently around £1200 The Sigma is less than half the price and again is a slow lens.

For wildlife and sport you ideall need as fast a lens as possible so here is a better alternative you might not have considered, the Sigma 120 - 300mm f/2.8 Incredibly shap lens capable of challenging the OEM's prime lenses (not quite as good though) and with the use of a teleconverter a 170 - 420mm f/4 or a 240 - 600mm f/5.6 This lens is the cheapest way to a 5 -600mm lens with working autofocus. up to 300mm it wll allow a massive 4 times as much light as the Canon 100 - 400mm allowing for much fast and accurate auto focus using the centre spot which the slower Canon cannot use.

Of course there's a bit of a problem, and that is the price - if you insist on new its £2k but second user you can get a good one for around £1K similar to the price of the Canon, but it's a much better lens!!

If you want to do the microadjuct on your lenses follow these instructions here

Thanks Flake.
Unfortunately no Sigmas available in the UK via Flea Bay and I have a total mistrust of it in any case.
What to you think of the 100 - 300 DO ?
I know its as slow as he others but a lot lighter to carry round.

[flake]

There's this which is brand new but none of the 100 - 300mm f/4 at a reasonable price Jessops are selling it for £599 according to camerapricebusters, that's a good price for a lens which is quite highly regarded.

The DO lenses are very expensive for a lens which covers the same zoom & aperture range of a much less expensive conventional one. The plus is the reduction in size & weight but it's not much in this type of lens, but the downside reported by many people is a loss of contrast which to most is unacceptable in all but the brightest of light. check out Fredmiranda to see what other users think, & photozone for objective tests.

[Gonefishin]

Weel I went and did it.
I treated myself to a Sigma 120-400.
First impressions are v. good. I'm werll pleased with it.
Its a country mile sharper than my Canon 100-300.
Autofocus not quite as faast as USM - perhaps it is but seems slower at 400mm.
The anti shake is really good as well helping to get sharp and detailed shots from up to half a mile distant.
What it can "see" at a distance is remarkable.
I doubt is at twice the price, the Canon 100 400 is anywhere near twice as good

It's bloody heavy though and more so when attached to the camera body.
More updates later when I summon up the strength to take it out again!
I wouldnt want to carry it all day, thats for sure so might have to get a shopping trolley to help out.

More updates later when I summon up the strength to take it out again!

Can anyone tell me why Sigma says to turn it off when attached to a tripod?

[matt wilson]

A lot of lenses with vibration reduction will carry on trying to stabilise the image even when on a tripod(actually causing a degradation in quality) .Hence turning VR off .Simple as that.

[Gonefishin]

Thanks Matt.
Understood.

[murfie]

Originally Posted by Gonefishin

Hi All
I’m new to the Forum but not to the Mag.
My interests are sport and nature photography.
I have a couple of questions for you and would welcome you opinions

I’ve just upgraded my camera from a 350D to a 50D and find that my 100/300 lens that I bought aeons ago with my EOS10 film camera whilst OK on the 350D no longer cuts the mustard on the 50D.

I’mtherefor in the market for a new lens and can’t make up my mind between the Canon 100 / 400 L Series and the Sigma 120/400 APO (not EX) lenses.

The recent Sigma review in the mag made no mention of the apertures / focal lengths which provided the sharpest pictures.
I note that neither is the actual focal length used ever mentioned in published photo information, unless of course a prime lens is used, although this info is available in the meta-data..

With my existing lens I normally shoot at 300mm and f5.6 with ISO adjusted to allow the fastest speed that at least 2x the focal length in use.

What, if any, quality improvements can I expect from each of the lenses when used wide-open at 300mm and 400mm.

Before I splash the cash perhaps my old lens needs a touch of in camera focus adjustment– how do I go about this please