Ok decided on two lenses, now which one? :)

[leightonjames]

Sigma 50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX DG APO HSM

or

Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 DG OS APO HSM

Difficult choice for me but please can some of you make it for me?

Tehn i promise i'll stop going on about lenses.

heres a comaprison of quality

http://www.pbase.com/miljenko/image/98272374

I will be using this lens for wildlife, motorsport and aircraft. The body is a 40D.

cheers

Leighton

[_dobbo_]

It appears from the list of acronyms that only the second one has stabilisation (OS). I'd get the stabilised one over the other every time. 500mm on a 40D is actually more like 750mm, and you'll need steady hands.

[john185k]

2nd

[RobDickinson]

Between the two? 2nd is a replacement for the 1st

Its lost the EX moniker due to sigma deciding to put that on constant aperture lenses now only (uh...)

Have a look over on dpreview canon lens forum theres some threads with test shots. I dont think its super hot wide open but OK stopped down.

[miniman]

Have you tried one? The 50-500 is huge and very heavy. You will struggle to use it handheld, even for a short period. As mentioned above, it's also poor wide open IMHO. Why do you need to go up to 500mm? I get one quite nicely with a 200mm. Personally I would go for quality over quantity! You're looking at somewhere around the £700 mark, so my choice would be the Canon 70-200 f/4 L USM plus a 1.4x teleconverter. This will get you up to nearly 300mm at f/5.6 and is in a different league.

[leightonjames]

miniman said:

Have you tried one? The 50-500 is huge and very heavy. You will struggle to use it handheld, even for a short period. As mentioned above, it's also poor wide open IMHO. Why do you need to go up to 500mm? I get one quite nicely with a 200mm. Personally I would go for quality over quantity! You're looking at somewhere around the £700 mark, so my choice would be the Canon 70-200 f/4 L USM plus a 1.4x teleconverter. This will get you up to nearly 300mm at f/5.6 and is in a different league.

I don't mind the hugeness/heaviness. I want enough zoom. The last thign i want to do is purchase a telephoto that just didn't reach. I have a feeling this will zoom in just fine! I dont think 200mm is enough for my requirements, and all this L malarky, it isn't for me.

[agent006]

750mm equivalent isn't a lens, it's a telescope. What are you shooting that needs 500mm?

[Podie]

We looked at the 50-500, but it's just too heavy, and the lack of IS makes things at 500mm a bit hard work.

We went for the Canon 100-400L and the 70-200 f/2.8 IS and use a teleconvertor if we want the extra reach.

Handy both of us having dSLRs...

[havoc]

I'd agree that 500 is just TOO big, unless your subjects are on the Moon!

Especially when you've a 10Mp camera and, unless you're planning to do poster-sized prints, you can increase your zoom afterwards by cropping the photo and still have A4-sized quality.

Just a thought...

[miniman]

leightonjames said:

and all this L malarky, it isn't for me.

With respect, why did you buy a 40D then? If you're not interested in the glass to do it justice, you might have been better off with a 400D and some more lenses.

[leightonjames]

miniman said:

leightonjames said:

and all this L malarky, it isn't for me.

With respect, why did you buy a 40D then? If you're not interested in the glass to do it justice, you might have been better off with a 400D and some more lenses.

many factors, 6.5fps, general feel of the camera and proper size, not a tiny little thing, nice three inch screen, live view mode, better sensor and so on.

and to be honest, i have seen a few L lens and sigma lens comparison and the difference really isn't justified in them? Unless the comparisons i am seeing is just total crap and hell why not buy a 40D? It was only 500 quid after cashback, whats a 400d 345? thats just a few extra hours for a lot more IMHO.

Would i just be better off going back to the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens

argh

Edited by leightonjames on Tuesday 8th July 19:05

[miniman]

Right, 11th August (that's not too far away!) - come down to Castle Combe where I will be doing a trackday. I will bring my 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM and my mate's Sigma 50-500, and maybe also his Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM, and you can try them all out for real! I guarantee that you will see the difference between the L lens and the Sigmas. If you don't, I will eat my shoes.

[Beyond Rational]

Most of the awesome track photograpy on here seems to have been taken with less than 500mm, you'll be carrying a lot of lense for a lot of situations where you won't need half of it's reach.

[RobDickinson]

Leighton - I tried out the 50-500, 100-300f4 and a few other sigmas in a shop.

Along side a 100-400L

My money will be buying the 100-400

Not as fast (opticaly) as the 100-300 or 120-300, but pretty sharp wide open and has IS, plus canons USM seems much more sure of itself than sigmas HSM.

Opticaly the 100-300/120-300 are supposed to be pretty sweet tho.

[agent006]

Just a quick google found a 150-500 review with this quote as a conclusion:

"Plain and simple, the Sigma just doesn't give the image quality I had hoped for, or that a Canon "L" series lens routinely delivers. Considering that you can even interpolate a Canon 400mm image up to an equivalent size as one taken with a the Sigma at 500mm and have as good or better image quality than that produced by the Sigma, even the Sigma's selling point of giving you an additional 100mm focal length quickly falls aside."
http://www.michaelfurtman.com/sigma150_500.htm

Seriously, if you've shelled out that much on a camera, don't cripple it with a poor lens for the sake of a bit more cash. At least make an informed choice rather than ignorantly dismissing "all this L malarky" off hand. The Ls really are a huge jump in quality, so don't be blinded by the numbers.

[miniman]

agent006 said:

Seriously, if you've shelled out that much on a camera, don't cripple it with a poor lens for the sake of a bit more cash. At least make an informed choice rather than ignorantly dismissing "all this L malarky" off hand. The Ls really are a huge jump in quality, so don't be blinded by the numbers.

Hear hear.

[leightonjames]

he also says

Let me repeat that the images produced by the Sigma are very, very nice

that'll do for me, people get too hung up on sharpness! I don't want to spark a debate. lets leave it here and ill post up my results with whichever i choose to purchase

thanks for all your help