Sigma 400mm lenses

[adam613]

I'm looking at the Sigma 135-400 DG lens as a possible upgrade option. It's about the same price as the Canon 70-300 IS, but it goes all the way to 400mm. I'm not terribly concerned about the lack of IS, because whenever I need a telephoto lens in low light, I'm on a tripod anyway. It's fairly small and light (compared to the Canon 100-400L, which I really am not a fan of due to size, or the Sigma 80-400 EX, which is like the 100-400L without USM). I'd primarily use this lens for plane-spotting.

This would be a great lens at the price if the image quality is acceptable. The guy at B&H told me it's similar to the Canon 70-300 IS, but I've heard mixed reviews. And it's hard to tell from reviews, because so many people use it wide open and complain about how soft it is, whereas people like us are quite satisfied at f/8.

Does anyone have this lens? Would you recommend it? Any better alternatives in the same price range (~$500)? Or should I just stick with the cheapo 70-300 until I can afford the 100-400L?

[PhilDernerJr]

First, I'm always weary of reviews that I hear from people in store or anywhere outside of our hobby. It's tough for their experiences to apply to us because what we do is very different. We often shoot something large, far, moving fast, coming towards and then past us. I can't think of many forms of photography that compare.

When light is good, your shots may well be crisp for you to not need IS on your lens because of a nice, easily attainable 1/500th shutter speed. However, IS helps not only with a clear image, but also in tracking what you're taking a photo of. On those very windy days, or days where it's cold and my hands are not 100%, the IS helps me track the subject and keep it centered in the frame...reducing the amount of cropping needed.

I'm not saying this because I have money, because I don't. But I will always, always urge people to hold out for a little longer to spend a few more bucks on better equipment. Once you're spending hundreds of dollars on camera equipment, you're already investing a good chunk, and you might as well hold off a little to save up a few more bucks to get the next best piece so that you do not sell yourself short.

So, I say hold off. The 100-400 will always be the ultimate spotter's lens, and a staple in the camera bag.

[NIKV69]

Phil makes a good point when researching what lens to buy don't listen to any store employees. They may have knowledge but more times than not you know more than them and they are trying to make a sale. Stick to the advice of good photogs.

After reading your post I am going to assume we are talking about shooting aviation in good conditions. So the F/4.5-5.6 will be ok for this. Now excluding IS (because it basically is there to just combat camera shake) I am also going to assume we are talking about holding the camera perfectly still. I am also going to assume your shutter speed is correct. I don't subscribe to jacking up the shutter speed to freeze the action but Phil had a good nuetral 1/500th. Now all things considered I would think the Canon glass would give you the better result. I happen to like my gear to be as heavy as possible so I can't help you with the weight but if your on a budget and want everything in one lens Phil is right get the 100-400.

[adam613]

Yeah, I know I should ask people with similar photography habits instead of people in the store. Which is why I posted here :)

It's not so much that budget is a limiting factor for me. In a few months, I can come up with the money for the 100-400 L. But it is a lot of money, and I'll feel a lot better about spending it if I know it's really the right thing.

I am aware of the fact that the 100-400 L is <deity>'s gift to aviation photography. But I don't like the idea of using a lens that heavy handheld. My arms are going to get tired and I'm not going to enjoy using it after an hour. Enjoyment takes priority over quality for me. And it happens that the smaller 400mm lens is both of lower quality and much cheaper. At the very worst, it's a significant step up from what I have.

(Side note: both Sigma lenses have a twisty zoom, which I like better than Canon's push-pull.)

But! Tonight, I saw someone using a monopod. That could kill many birds with one stone. A monopod is much less cumbersome to carry around than a tripod, which is important since I don't own a car. Photography-wise, either I won't miss the IS because I'll have something to steady my camera, or I won't mind the weight of the 100-400 L because I'll have something to support it. And if I get a pan/tilt head or a ballhead, I'll be easily able to follow the plane. Good idea?

(Now that I think about it, I should probably buy a monopod anyway. It would be useful on my city photography excursions.)

[lijk604]

Having been one who purchased a Sigma zoom in the past, I would reiterate Phil's comments. Wait for the 100-400L, you will NOT be disappointed. The lens is not THAT heavy or you would see all of us out there using mono or tri-pods. The group has been out for 4-6 hours at a time with the 1-4L and you never see anyone complaining about their arms hurting.

Trust me on this next point as well, the IS is something that I thought I didnt need either, then once I got the lens with that wonderful IS, my keeper rate went from 50% to 90%. You will get used to the push-pull zoom quickly it's really not that big of an adjustment.

As for the mono-pod idea, unless you are shooting still aircraft, forget it. You'll be the only one with the mono-pod, and when an aircraft you really want comes by, you'll be the guy smacking everyone else in the shins as you try and track it. :wink: j/k

That's my 2 cents. Take it for what its worth.

[PhilDernerJr]

I also would recommend getting the American version of the lens, and getting the warranty with it. Both are very important for protecting your equipment.

[adam613]

Hm. I'll have to rent it a few more times and see how I feel about it...maybe I'll get used to the weight.

[NIKV69]

Well again the weight is somethng you have to decide upon. Phil raises another good point avoid grey market like the plague. As for the other things like preferring a push pull opposed to twist is another thing to consider. Try them all and make your decision.

[adam613]

Yeah, I know about avoiding gray market stuff. It isn't cheaper enough to be a temptation, really. The US warranty on the Canon is one year; the Sigma 80-400 EX has a four year warranty. The grey market models have no warranty at all. For a $10 difference, is it really even a question? :)

[NIKV69]

Well you have to consider something else in addition to the warranty. If you want to get your lens serviced outside of warranty Canon will not touch it. They don't deal with grey market in any way. For someone like me I don't let anybody but Nikon touch my stuff when it needs service other than dust cleaning and judging by how good Berger Bros did on my 70 looks like Nikon will do that too. You never know when you will need to have work done on your lens after the warranty expires.

[Mellyrose]

Just wanted to chime in quickly because I noticed the "twist" versus "push/pull" factor. When Phil first put the 100-400 in my hands, not only did I think "MAN, this is heavy" but I was like "wow that is awkward feeling" with the push-pull since I was used to shorter twisty zoom lenses. Not 10 minutes later, I was used to it. Even though I use twist zooms still, once someone lent me a long lens which had the twist feature, and I thought that for aviation photography and the speed we have to zoom in an out while panning, the push pull is much more efficient. Obviously, this is just my opinion, but I wanted to share since I had the same viewpoint as you before I started using the 100-400. Also, I promise, you do get used to the weight. I have serious neck problems, and if I can let that thing hang around my neck for 10 hours, anyone can ;)

Do what feels right for you, but any lens is gonna cost a good amount of money. I think we just want you to be satisfied and really happy with the final results!

[T-Bird76]

Adam I'm going to tell you the same thing I told you about your camera, either wait a bit and save the money or just make the investment and be done with it. I would not go with the Sigma, when you’re shooting 300mm to 400mm with no IS your shots are going to suffer. The price difference between the U.S versions of Canon's 100-400 and the Intl version is nil. Go with the U.S version.

I'd also recommend seeing if B&H has any Canon Demos. My 100-400 is a Canon Demo and I saved about $200 off the normal price and it came with a full Canon Warranty. As for weight your not holding the camera for 8 hours straight so as for your arms getting tired, its not going to happen. More so your neck might start bothering you but then I'd recomend getting a weight reducing strap or just put the camera down.

The 100-400 is the spotter’s choice lens other then a 2.8 70-200 with the extender. If you want the best results buy L glass and make the investment, you'll be glad you did in the long run. I know your eager to get out of the gate running but do it wisely and ensure you have the right equipment.

[NIKV69]

Also, I promise, you do get used to the weight. I have serious neck problems, and if I can let that thing hang around my neck for 10 hours, anyone can


One of the reasons I don't use the straps on my stuff. Remember one important thing. Any weight put on the front of your body puts a magnified strain on your back and neck. I actually don't understand how you guys with the 400 let that thing hang from your neck for any period of time. It can't be good. Also remember Adam that if you do use the strap you can let it hang on your shoulder to the side between shots which is must better.

[adam613]

I thought about the IS thing, and realized that with the amount of low-light photography I do outside of aviation, it probably doesn't make sense for me to buy ANY non-IS lens (except for a better walkaround lens, but I should start a separate thread for that).

And as I mentioned above, total expenditure isn't really my concern. I don't mind spending money; I do mind spending this kind of money on something I'll be less than thrilled with. Stretching my budget a bit to get the 20D instead of the Rebel XTI, for example, was absolutely the right call; love at first click, if there is such a thing.

But I'm not quite as in love with the 100-400 L. I played with the Sigma 80-400 EX (which is also image stabilized) in B&H on Tuesday, and I liked the feel of it better, but I have no idea how it will perform in real life. I'm inclined to think I'm going to get better photos from the 100-400 L, and the 100-400 L focuses a bit faster, but I never felt particularly limited by the focus speed of the Panasonic FZ50; you could get old and die waiting for that thing to find a distant target.

Here's what I'm going to do: The first few weekends this year when we get some nice weather, I'll rent the 100-400 L. (Maybe even this weekend). I'll see if I get used to it. Then in the spring, when good weather over a long period of time easy to come buy, I'll buy the Sigma 80-400 EX from somewhere that has a liberal return policy (ie B&H). If I don't strongly prefer the Canon, I'll keep the Sigma. The price difference isn't significant at that level.


Also remember Adam that if you do use the strap you can let it hang on your shoulder to the side between shots which is must better.

Good call! My shoulder can hold a lot more weight than my neck. A better strap is definitely going to be a good investment...the one I got with my camera is crap...does anyone have a preferred option? I don't care if it says Nikon on it :)

[eric8669]

I would recommend not going with the Sigma. I had purchased the Sigma 80-400 prior to purchasing the Canon 100-400. I had alot of problems with that Lens. Now it could of just been the copy I had, but I had serious focus issues between 300mm to 400mm. Eventually the optics got all misaligned and had to have the lens repaired. This all happend within 3 months of purchase. After the lens was repaired I ended up selling it and going with Canon. The Sigma is also heavier then the Canon. I do however also own the Sigma 70-200 2.8 which I think is an excellent lens.

[FlyingColors]

Just wanted to chime in quickly because I noticed the "twist" versus "push/pull" factor. When Phil first put the 100-400 in my hands, not only did I think "MAN, this is heavy" but I was like "wow that is awkward feeling" with the push-pull since I was used to shorter twisty zoom lenses. Not 10 minutes later, I was used to it. Even though I use twist zooms still, once someone lent me a long lens which had the twist feature, and I thought that for aviation photography and the speed we have to zoom in an out while panning, the push pull is much more efficient. Obviously, this is just my opinion, but I wanted to share since I had the same viewpoint as you before I started using the 100-400. Also, I promise, you do get used to the weight. I have serious neck problems, and if I can let that thing hang around my neck for 10 hours, anyone can ;)

Do what feels right for you, but any lens is gonna cost a good amount of money. I think we just want you to be satisfied and really happy with the final results!

This is well put...

I my case I tried, and tried and tried that Canon 100-400. Sorry. No way for me. Just can't get a good feel for that crazy push-pull.

Your going to have to try out the gear and get your own feel for it.

[FlyingColors]

I'm looking at the Sigma 135-400 DG lens as a possible upgrade option. It's about the same price as the Canon 70-300 IS, but it goes all the way to 400mm. I'm not terribly concerned about the lack of IS, because whenever I need a telephoto lens in low light, I'm on a tripod anyway. It's fairly small and light (compared to the Canon 100-400L, which I really am not a fan of due to size, or the Sigma 80-400 EX, which is like the 100-400L without USM). I'd primarily use this lens for plane-spotting.

This would be a great lens at the price if the image quality is acceptable. The guy at B&H told me it's similar to the Canon 70-300 IS, but I've heard mixed reviews. And it's hard to tell from reviews, because so many people use it wide open and complain about how soft it is, whereas people like us are quite satisfied at f/8.

Does anyone have this lens? Would you recommend it? Any better alternatives in the same price range (~$500)? Or should I just stick with the cheapo 70-300 until I can afford the 100-400L?

FWIW- try out that 50-500 Sigma ( I think thats what it is) Monty loves his and his shots are tops!

[NIKV69]

Here's what I'm going to do: The first few weekends this year when we get some nice weather, I'll rent the 100-400 L. (Maybe even this weekend). I'll see if I get used to it. Then in the spring, when good weather over a long period of time easy to come buy, I'll buy the Sigma 80-400 EX from somewhere that has a liberal return policy (ie B&H). If I don't strongly prefer the Canon, I'll keep the Sigma. The price difference isn't significant at that level.



I was going to say you have to take both lenses out in the field. What I would do is rent both for a day with sun and with the same exact camera settings take shot with both lenses and compare the raw results. Then factor in the feel and weight as well.

[FlyingColors]

Here's what I'm going to do: The first few weekends this year when we get some nice weather, I'll rent the 100-400 L. (Maybe even this weekend). I'll see if I get used to it. Then in the spring, when good weather over a long period of time easy to come buy, I'll buy the Sigma 80-400 EX from somewhere that has a liberal return policy (ie B&H). If I don't strongly prefer the Canon, I'll keep the Sigma. The price difference isn't significant at that level.



I was going to say you have to take both lenses out in the field. What I would do is rent both for a day with sun and with the same exact camera settings take shot with both lenses and compare the raw results. Then factor in the feel and weight as well.

(Here we go..)
And prey tell how do you see the "raw" results? You gonna print above mural size 40X60 ?

[NIKV69]

And prey tell how do you see the "raw" results? You gonna print above mural size 40X60 ?



Not at all, but if I was comparing two lenses for purchase I would want to see how the capture looks before ACR optimizes it. As for what lens gives the better results.

[adam613]

I was going to say you have to take both lenses out in the field. What I would do is rent both for a day with sun and with the same exact camera settings take shot with both lenses and compare the raw results. Then factor in the feel and weight as well.

Yeah, except I haven't been able to find anyone who rents the Sigma. Which might tell me something... :)

[Eddie.]

Not to derail or anything. But what are your opinions on the Sigma 50-500.


This is for a Nikon user though :oops:

[Mellyrose]

Also, I promise, you do get used to the weight. I have serious neck problems, and if I can let that thing hang around my neck for 10 hours, anyone can


One of the reasons I don't use the straps on my stuff. Remember one important thing. Any weight put on the front of your body puts a magnified strain on your back and neck. I actually don't understand how you guys with the 400 let that thing hang from your neck for any period of time. It can't be good. Also remember Adam that if you do use the strap you can let it hang on your shoulder to the side between shots which is must better.

I actually strap it across my body (like a messenger bag) while shooting sometimes, or over my shoulder like a handbag when I'm not using it for an extended period of time. It alleviates the weight off of major points in my neck.

The push pull vs. twist IS gonna be a personal preference....just my opinion that after using both, it seems easier to pan and zoom with the Canon. You can adjust the tightness of the push/pull to your liking.

Also, even in THE BEST light, without IS, you will see a difference. I once shot a whole morning with the IS switch shut off (by accident) and I came home to edit and everything just looked a little "off" - fuzzy, regis were softer than normal, more photos were just trash. With the type of photography we do, I feel the IS is essential for best quality shots.

[PhilDernerJr]

Like I mentioned, when you're out there on a windy day, the IS helps your aim when panning and framing. Simple as that.

As for the push-pull, I don't think I'd ever be comfortable with a long twist zoom. I'd hate to equate it to this, but it lets me always have my hand on the bottom of the lens, where I feel more stable, similar to that of holding a rifle. If I were holding such a long lens with a few fingers with my hand at the side of the lens after an in or out zoom, I'd feel less comfortable and my framing and panning would suffer greatly.

With that, I most cmmonly prefer to keep my camera strap over my right arm, and I adjusted the straps so that when brought up to my face, the forward/upward pulling of the camera from my shoulder makes the strpa tight, and therefore also more secure, giving me more stability.

That's just how I do it. I take framing and panning very seriously with my shooting as earlier in my "career" I've lost some potentially amazing photos with blur, regardless of whether or not I was in good light.

[NIKV69]

I found a nice write up from Ken Rockwell about the whole IS thing. I agree with him. In any photography that involves motion you get your best results from using a faster lens and ideal light and bumping the ISO a tad. Makes sense since since I can get a much sharper picture with my 200 2.8 that is a non VR as opposed to my 400 set at a 200 focal length with the VR on. Both handheld in ideal light and held just as steady. Now we all know a fast 400mm lens is mucho dinero but for comparison it makes sense. Here is Ken's take on it.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/image-stabilization.htm

[eric8669]

The Sigma 80-400 does have OS(Optical Stabilization)

Sigma 80-400 review
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/show ... =37&page=3 (http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=223&sort=7&cat=37&page=3)

Canon 100-400 Review
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/show ... =27&page=1 (http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=19&sort=7&cat=27&page=1)

[Gus]

I have the Sigma 80-400mm OS for Nikon. POS.. I hate it. It locks up and its really soft past 300mm. I cant tell you how many times I have lost a shot because of my door stop. Save up and buy the real deal the 100-400mm Canon. When Nikon comes out with a 80-400mm AF-S VR version, I am buying it. I tried to be a penny pincher and now I have to rebuy it. I never learn. You pay for what you get.

[NIKV69]

I have the Sigma 80-400mm OS for Nikon. POS.. I hate it. It locks up and its really soft past 300mm. I cant tell you how many times I have lost a shot because of my door stop. Save up and buy the real deal the 100-400mm Canon. When Nikon comes out with a 80-400mm AF-S VR version, I am buying it. I tried to be a penny pincher and now I have to rebuy it. I never learn. You pay for what you get.



But VR doesn't combat softness it combats blur due to the camera shake. If you want ultra sharp pics with a 400MM you need a 2.8 lens. So you better go rob a bank. Any slow 400MM lens even in good light is going to be tough between 300-400MM. You need a perfect capture and some USM in PS.

[Gus]

I have the Sigma 80-400mm OS for Nikon. POS.. I hate it. It locks up and its really soft past 300mm. I cant tell you how many times I have lost a shot because of my door stop. Save up and buy the real deal the 100-400mm Canon. When Nikon comes out with a 80-400mm AF-S VR version, I am buying it. I tried to be a penny pincher and now I have to rebuy it. I never learn. You pay for what you get.



But VR doesn't combat softness it combats blur due to the camera shake. If you want ultra sharp pics with a 400MM you need a 2.8 lens. So you better go rob a bank. Any slow 400MM lens even in good light is going to be tough between 300-400MM. You need a perfect capture and some USM in PS.

I have used a friends Nikkor 80-400mm VR lens and compared to the Sigma version, its no comparison. The Nikon blows it away. I know how VR works. The thing I hate worst about the Sigma is the lack of focus limit switch. The Nikon has it. This POS loses focus and then it has to rack from infinity and back to close before it acquires the target again. In aviation photography thats a big no-no. Its too late when the AN-225 just went by and your Crapma I mean Sigma just crapped out again. My Sigma has been to the Sigma, NY repair shop three times. If it was a car, it would be a lemon.

[NIKV69]

I have used a friends Nikkor 80-400mm VR lens and compared to the Sigma version, its no comparison. The Nikon blows it away. I know how VR works. The thing I hate worst about the Sigma is the lack of focus limit switch. The Nikon has it. This POS loses focus and then it has to rack from infinity and back to close before it acquires the target again. In aviation photography thats a big no-no. Its too late when the AN-225 just went by and your Crapma I mean Sigma just crapped out again. My Sigma has been to the Sigma, NY repair shop three times. If it was a car, it would be a lemon.

There is no lemon law either like with cars, I own that Nikkor lens and it does sound like even though it's not the greatest it is much better than the Sigma. Yea if your lens is constantly taking that long to acquire the subject to focus your going to miss every shot. Time to get rid of that thing.