LHRsunriser From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2004, 399 posts, RR: 2 Posted (9 years 7 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5744 times:
I am in a dilemma at present. I have around £350 and I am looking towards a new lens.
The lenses in question are predominantly the Sigma 100-300 F/4 with 1.4x converter. Can I have an opinion of the quality of this lens please on it's own and with the converter if possible.
The other lenses would be the Bigma 50-500 which would set me back more than the others as I would need a new bag and a BG-E1. The cheapest option would be the Sigma 70-200 2.8 with 2x converter, but I guess quality is lost in that.
VIR380 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2002, 628 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (9 years 7 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5723 times:
Quoting LHRsunriser (Thread starter): Can I have an opinion of the quality of this lens please on it's own and with the converter if possible.
Simple .... buy the lens !
ive used it for a while now , i have no problems in recommending the lens to anyone , rapid focus and pin sharp images
I have the EX 1.4 conv also but have yet to find a use for it yet , although i have played with it on the lens , the focus is a little slower and the F4 becomes F5.6 as for the image quality i ant comment on yet .
hope this helps
Edit : I also have used the 70-200 f2.8 ... that lens was by far the best i have ever owned ! however the downside was the maximum 200mm , when you have a lower F number on the lens you do not need IS , i would always go with F2.8 or F4 rather than IS personally simple reason of cost and i have NEVER once thought i wish i had IS
Sfilipowicz From Netherlands, joined Jul 2002, 327 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (9 years 7 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5728 times:
I can't give you any own experience advice on those lenses, but can maybe give you some advice.
I have just bought a 100-400 IS L Canon lens but before I bought it, I looked into some othere lenses. I looked into the combination 200mm 2x converter. After reading several website I decided not to go for the 2x converter as this give a 'poor' result. A lot better was the 1.4x convert but this wasn't enough zoom for me. So I wouldn't go for the Sigma 70-200 with 2x converter option if I was you.
If money isn't a problem, I would go for the Bigma 50-500. Quality is (from what I read) good. The only problem could be the weight of the lens.
LHRsunriser From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2004, 399 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (9 years 7 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5714 times:
Thanks very much. Well the 100-300 is at the top of the list atm closely followed byt he Bigma. I used the Bigma at the Southend airshow. It was peachy, I could hack the weight but would have to rest the camera down somewhere.
I was just wondering as I will not often shoot full out 500mm, will the 100-300 at 420mm 5.6 give me good image quality with pretty quick focusing. Tony is the focusing real slow?
Ua935 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 612 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (9 years 7 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 5691 times:
Quoting LHRsunriser (Thread starter): The other lenses would be the Bigma 50-500 which would set me back more than the others as I would need a new bag and a BG-E1. The cheapest option would be the Sigma 70-200 2.8 with 2x converter, but I guess quality is lost in that
Erm I think you should check your prices out.
The 50-500 is circa £649 the 70-200 F2.8 EX HSM + 2x converter is £818.
The 70-200 + converter is far from the cheapest option.
The 70-200 F2.8 EX HSM is a stunning lens, I own this along with the 1.4 converter and the quality is stunning.
LGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (9 years 7 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 5635 times:
I use the 100-300mm f4 and love it.
The 100-300mm f4 does AF with the 1.4 and will become f5.6 throughout the zoom range. I have yet to try the 100-300mm f4 with a 1.4 although I am tempted to get one but knowing the 100-300 speed I can't belive it would impact much on the speed.
PS Let me know if you do get the combo how the images are and the AF speed
Quite simply I will get the 100-300 with the converter which will give me 420mm of reach or I will dish out alot more money for most like the same optical quality if not worse for the Bigma. But it has the extra reach, but 60mm isn't much as I never go wack out on a lens alot of the time.
Ben, I will let you know but since I need another 300 quid if I am going to get the converter aswell lol it will be a while.