Sigma 170-500 or Canon 100-400IS ?

[mnementh]

Ok

I've got the Sigma and got some really nice shots down at Marwell over the weekend, however quite a few shots were ruined because of shake even though I was using a monopod.

Now this was the first time I'd used the lens, and also the first time I'd used a monopod, so I'm assuming I'll get better over time.

However, I don't think I'm always going to be in the situation where I'll have a monopod or tripod to hand, and handheld at 500mm will not produce the results I want.

So - should I switch to a 100-400IS ? Will I miss the extra 100mm the Sigma gives me, or will this be compensated by the IS ?

Or is there a Sigma equivalent with OS ?

Comments, laughter, ridicule ??

Cheers :)

[sideshowbob]

If you get decent shots with the 100-400IS, you could crop to get that extra 100mm back. There is also a Sigma 80-400 OS, but I've no idea how that performs - their Bigma (50-500mm) doesn't have OS, at least not in its current incarnation (I reckon they'll add it to the next version).

[Highlander]

There is a Sigma 80-400mm OS, which I believe Sam has recently purchased.

I've got the 100-400mm IS and love it. It's probably my most used lens.

[Radiohead]

The Nikkor 80-400mm I tried at Marwell isn't a keeper for me. I found that shooting animals in anything other than the amazing sun we had on Saturday meant using f7.1 or thereabouts and shutter speeds of 1/100s at 400mm, even with VR that was a struggle. Mind you, I didn't have my monopod that day ;) . I'm firmly in the faster is better camp now.

That said, I don't think I'd shoot at 200mm+ much and have the 70-200mm f2.8 VR, so the range isn't that needed for my typical shooting. YMMV!

[Sam]

As Highlander says I have the Sigma 80-400 OS and love it. Very sharp pretty much throughout the range (slightly softer at 400 than at 380 but only noticeable if look for it at 100% crop) and OS allows 3 or 4 extra stops handheld IME (I do have quite steady hands though). Significantly cheaper than the Canon and I've not found significanty comments on the QA (unlike the Canon). Normally I buy Canon lenses from choice but having gone to buy the 100-400 and had 2 wrong off the shelf new and read numerous problems about bearings failing within 2 years of new I went for a 2nd hand Sigma. It took a while to get used to handling it as it is a big lens but now I'm getting to grips with it - wow!

I'll try and post some pics later (put a new HD in my laptop this morning so currently have no software!) for you to have a look at.

[mnementh]

Cheers Sam - would appreciate that

[Sam]

All my pics from RIAT here (http://www.thedvdforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6567377&postcount=4) & here (http://www.thedvdforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6566430&postcount=493) were all taken with Sigma. Here's a link to a full size pic taken at Kemble: http://www.standerwick-images.com/IMG_5681.jpg

and here's a 100% crop from the same picture. I have made no adjustments to it (no USM or levels adjusted). Shot in RAW EXIF: f9.0, 1/200s, ISO100, 400mm

http://www.standerwick-images.com/Sigma1.jpg

[mnementh]

:thumbs:

[DamienB]

Looking at that shot, it is just as sharp as the Canon 100-400 at 400mm, perhaps even a touch sharper. And of course, less likely to fall to bits.

[mnementh]

Well I've ordered a Sigma 80-400 OS - should be delivered tomorrow.

Just need to sell my 170-500 now :)

[Matholwch]

Wasn't Samiad getting the Canon one? I'll be intetested to see what he says, as I'm also looking to get a longer lens.

[mnementh]

Must say I'm loving the 80-400 OS - Most of the shots I took at the Ferrari day were with it, all handheld.

Highly reccommend it :thumbs:

[Sam]

Glad you're getting on well with it. More I use it the more I like it!