StealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5424 posts, RR: 49 Reply 2, posted (5 years 12 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 3679 times:
I am not convinced at this level that the advice you get online(anywhere not just at A.net) is that meaningful.
For my money I would be trying them both out and for this kind of purchase a retailer that would not allow me to do that would not be getting their hands on my credit card(like my credit card could handle that purchase)
But since you asked, I would be going with the 500 prime and perhaps the 1.4TC for the occaisions I needed more, but that depends on how much of your planned usage would need less that 500mm.
I have my needs below 500mm pretty well covered.
Too many questions, too little info.
Cheers
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
Fergulmcc From Ireland, joined Oct 2004, 1916 posts, RR: 55 Reply 4, posted (5 years 12 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3613 times:
Chris makes a good point here. See if you can hire them out first and then make a decision. This is some serious money that you are parting with, more than the price of some cars, so do the homework!! You are not going to buy a car without test driving it are you!
Personaly I would go for the prime as the optics would be a lot better and I don't feel there is a need for me to go to 800mm and if I did well the 1.4TC would bring me up to 700/5.6 and still have AF I might be 100mm short but I won't loose any sleep over it!
I own the 500/4 and love it. I use if for my wildlife photography and when I can, some sports as well.
Tin67 From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 266 posts, RR: 3 Reply 6, posted (5 years 12 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3589 times:
I'll add my twopence.
When you are spending that kind of money and you are not sure, you can only try them out for yourself to ensure they meet your requirements. I can offer some past experience when looking to buy a 300 prime where I went Sigma initially, but soon went back to Canon.
Before anyone out shoots me down! I must stress again that this is a personal experience and does not represent Sigma lenses as a whole.
3 years ago I wanted a 300mm prime and had 2 lenses in mind. Sigma 300 EX f/2.8 and the Canon 300 f/4 IS L. I didn't get the chance to try the Canon, but at a show I was able to test the Sigma and it appeared to be a good lens. I bought one!
Optically I could not fault it, the results were excellent. However there were downfalls that soon became apparent. The autofocus was awful. It would hunt, it was slow and if shooting through a fence, as there was no AF distance settings it kept hunting and the shot was lost. I thought I'd just have to live with that, but then the lens casing near to the drop in filter became lose and internal lens seals starting dropping on to the optics. I contacted LCE Southampton where I bought it and they requested I took it back immediately. They offered me a replacement and when I mentioned I was not happy with the AF and would like to try a Canon they suggested I took this one for a week and if not happy come back for a refund or swap. I took it to Duxford and got some great results, but the AF was still very poor, I had also lost confidence in the product. I went back to the LCE tried a Canon 300 f/4. The difference was amazing, the AF was pin point and fast so I changed.
I remained happy with that lens and recently upgraded to the Canon 300 f/2.8 IS L and that is simply superb.
I can't believe that all the large Sigmas are like the one I had, I had a bad one but that experience sticks and I wouldn't spend that kind of money on another. My Canon 300 f/2.8 cost me double the price of the Sigma, but it was well worth it in my mind. I am also confident that if I ever sell the Canon, I know I'll get a good price. I've sold other L glass and there is always a good demand for well looked after L lenses. I wouldn't share the same confidence selling a Sigma.
Ultimately it's your choice and this should really be made on the basis of which lens meets your requirements and through testing them extensively, not just for 10 minutes in a store. You wouldn't spend €6-7k on a car without driving it first.
Fergulmcc From Ireland, joined Oct 2004, 1916 posts, RR: 55 Reply 11, posted (5 years 12 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3513 times:
Quoting Xenon (Reply 9): I already own a Sigma 50-500 and realy love the 500mm
Never used it, but from fellow photographers who have its meant to be an excellent lens. Good luck with your choice, hope you make the right one. But talking from a 500/4 owner, I love it. Quality is simply stunning.
IngemarE From Sweden, joined Mar 2005, 285 posts, RR: 6 Reply 13, posted (5 years 12 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3408 times:
Having tried the Sigma 300-800 out, I must tell you it's an awesome lens!!
That goes for picture quality as well as size,....because seriously man.....this is one mother of a lens!!!
However, if you intend on using it for av-photography, I'd have to say it's not the best choice.
I'll give you a couple of reasons;
#1: It's huge.
#2: It weighs a lot!!
#3: You will need a tripod. (This reduces your ability to chose and follow targets.)
#4: No optical stabilization. (Don't underestimate the difficulty of keeping the lens still @ 800mm!)
#5: You will probably not have much use for the 800mil's anyway, since heat-haze have a tendency to ruin long distance shots.
Apart from this,....its fantastic and I'd really recommend it if you're doing lots of wildlife photography.
Quick question to those who own the Bigma, 50-500/4-6.3, do you still have AF on the 30D and less, bodies at the 500 end. If I am not mistaken, the smallest aperture the Canon bodies will AF is f5.6, anything bigger, i.e. 6.3 and above you are down to MF, just curious!
Fergulmcc From Ireland, joined Oct 2004, 1916 posts, RR: 55 Reply 18, posted (5 years 12 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3294 times:
Quoting Tin67 (Reply 17): it's f/8 where the D30s etc stop autofocussing.
I do know that the 20D won't Af at f8 Martin. I only know this as when you put a x2TC on a 300/4 you only have MF and from some of the technical data that I have read, can't remember where, but it does say that above f5.6 you have MF. I do know that the 1D cameras can AF up to f8 due to their complex AF system.
Sponsor Message: 
From Belgium, joined Aug 2001, 494 posts, 
From Canada, joined Mar 2005, 236 posts, 
From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5424 posts, 
From Spain, joined Oct 2004, 1370 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Oct 2004, 1916 posts, 
From Tunisia, joined Oct 2001, 3295 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 266 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Mar 2005, 285 posts, 
From Poland, joined Sep 2002, 1854 posts, 
Must check the spec on my Monopod!
Printer friendly format 
