Upgrade from 100-400 (1 Viewer)

[jack21]

Hello.

I used to take the Canon 400/5.6: Very high resolution, sharp, fast AF. I've sold it due to the lack of IS and missing flexibility/zoom and got a very sharp copy of the 100-400/4.5-5.6.

Now I am thinking of upgrading the 100-400 and am looking for a hand-holdable lens that is brighter, has a better IS and - if possible - more reach. Would the Sigma 120-300/2.8 OS HSM + 1.4x be a good choice? I want to use it wide open (otherwise I could stick to the 100-400). Therefore some questions:

• Is the 120-300 + 1.4x a real step up compared to 100-400? It's a gain of just one aperture + 20mm.
• Is there a difference in IQ or AF between the non-S- and the S-Version of the 120-300/2.8?
• Is the IQ wide open with 1.4x as good a sharp 100-400 at 400 wide open?
• Is the AF with 1.4x as fast and precise as the AF of the 100-400?
• Which 1.4x converter would you recommend (Kenko MC4 DGX)?

I know, Canon's 200-400/4 would be a good choice, but it's way too expensive for me.

 

[Vernon Barker]

As a general rule, don't use a zoom lens with a converter.
In my experience, a Canon 100-400 is a step up from a Sigma 120-300 with a 1.4 converter.

 

[Tarsiger]

I know many won't agree but to my mind if you're using a TC for more than ten percent of shots you've bought the wrong lens.
Good luck with choice.
Russ

 

[Paul Jarvis]

I too am struggling with this the example images and reviews I've seen say its a very good choice but I'm still not 100% convinced. I'm hoping a sigma 300 2.8 os with be announced in the near future. Price might be a question mark though.

 

[johnf3f]

The Canon 200-400 seems to be the only one that fits your requirements, pity about the price!
What subjects are you photographing and what camera are you currently using? Perhaps knowing that may help with suggestions.

 

[the black fox]

theres always the tamron 150-600os as a option and as you live in a super light area ,it would probably solve a lot of problems

 

[Tim Taylor]

I moved to the first Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS version from the Canon 100-400mm. Nice to have the low light abilities and ability to get up to 600mm with the 2x TC. I've not had concerns with the IQ but I've had a lot of problems with the focus mechanism and speed. Like you I think the 200-400 ticks a lot of boxes but the only way I could contemplate this would be to move to Nikon and get a second hand one for £2,800 approx. I've invested too heavily in Canon lenses to make this financially sensible so will probably get a Canon 300mm f2.8 mkI in due course and stick with the 70-200mm f4 as my only zoom.

I haven't tried the latest incarnation of the Sigma 120-300mm OS and it may be way better. See what others say.

Tim :t:

 

[Paul Jarvis]

I noticed that the priced of second hand canon 300 2.8 mk1s had gone up on mpb which would put that further out of my price budget.

 

[jack21]

I have thought about Tamron's 150-600, too. But it won't be a real step up from my 100-400 except for more reach (same IQ and same max apertures, but heavier and bigger). But the IQ beyond 500 mm wide open would just be "okay" at the most and there seem to be issues with AF speed on a 7D. Why the hell didn't they limit it to 150-500? It would be lighter, shorter and with good IQ at max focal length wide open.

Probably I have to do without flexibility and wait until/if Sigma offers a 300/2.8 HSM OS with good IQ with 1.4x. Unfortunately the release of a 300/2.8 HSM OS has long been predicted.

 

[njlarsen]

Or until canon updates the 100-400?

Niels

 

[Roy C]

I have thought about Tamron's 150-500, too. But it won't be a real step up from my 100-400 except for more reach (same IQ and same max apertures, but heavier and bigger). But the IQ beyond 500 mm wide open would just be "okay" at the most and there seem to be issues with AF speed on a 7D. Why the hell didn't they limit it to 150-500? It would be lighter, shorter and with good IQ at max focal length wide open.

Probably I have to do without flexibility and wait until/if Sigma offers a 300/2.8 HSM OS with good IQ with 1.4x. Unfortunately the release of a 300/2.8 HSM OS has long been predicted.

I guess you are referring to the Tamron 150-600 (not 150-500), actually it is not a bad lens even at the the maximum of 600mm but as you indicate you would need to stop down a bit to retain sharpness at the long end. At 400mm it gives the 100-400 and 400/5.6 a run for its money (even wide open at f5.6) and you have the extra 200mm on top. BTW the VC (IS) is a lot better than the 100-400 and is rated at 4 stops.
I have shot the Tammy mostly on the 5D3 and the AF is both quick and accurate as you would expect (I always shoot in AI servo mode even for perched birds). - I have also tried it on my old 40D and the AF seems fine.
For a big step-up for you I would go for either the 200-400 or 300/2.8 IS but both heavier and more expensive (a used 300/2.8 IS Mk I is not too bad a price and is a superb lens at 420mm and very usable at 600mm).

Attached are a few samples from the Tammy taken at the long end of the zoom, all except the Rhea are at 600mm. Nothing special but very good value for money IMHO.

 

[jack21]

Or until canon updates the 100-400?

Niels

Why should one trade in an old 100-400 for a new one? My 100-400 is tack sharp. The new one will probably have a better IS and no push-pull (which I prefer), so it won't be a real step up.

 

[jack21]

I guess you are referring to the Tamron 150-600 (not 150-500), [...]

Yes, sorry. I've just corrected the term.

I have shot the Tammy mostly on the 5D3 and the AF is both quick and accurate as you would expect (I always shoot in AI servo mode even for perched birds). - I have also tried it on my old 40D and the AF seems fine.

Unfortunately there are many posts that indicate issuses with Servo-AF on 7D bodies.

Perhaps I have to wait for Sigma to sell a 1.4x-usable 300/2.8 OS HSM...

 

[Roy C]

Unfortunately there are many posts that indicate issuses with Servo-AF on 7D bodies.

I also read about all those issues but has that not now been address with the AF firmware update offered by Tamron?
I have heard of a lot of folk who had issues with AI servo and the 7D (and all other older Cameras) but are now pleased with it after sending the lens in for the fix.
Mine is fairly recent lens so the AF was already up-dated I guess. I would have thought that if it works OK in AI servo mode on the 40D then it should be OK on the 7D but could be wrong. From previous experience I would say that The Tammy is sightly faster AF than the 100-400 (at 400mm ) but a tad slower than the 400/5.6.
p.s. I also read a lot about the lens being soft at the long end but I am just not seeing it myself - I think a lot of it is to do with the fact that an awful lot of users of the Tamron are in experienced with long lenses, trying to hand hold at 600mm on 1/25 sec and crazy things like that.
BTW after shooting for years with nothing but Canon 'L' primes (inc the excellent 300/2.8 IS) I was the biggest skeptic of the Tammy but all I can say is that it has surprised me and would choose it over the 100-400 even it it cost a little more.

 

[jack21]

I also read about all those issues but has that not now been address with the AF firmware update offered by Tamron?

Never heard about a firmware update for lenses. But perhaps the problem is generally fixed with later copies.

I would say that The Tammy is sightly faster AF than the 100-400 (at 400mm ) but a tad slower than the 400/5.6.

Can't imagine any other "budget" lens' AF being as fast as Canon's 400/5.6. Just the IS is lacking, otherwise it was the perfect birding lens.

p.s. I also read a lot about the lens being soft at the long end but I am just not seeing it myself - I think a lot of it is to do with the fact that an awful lot of users of the Tamron are in experienced with long lenses, trying to hand hold at 600mm on 1/25 sec and crazy things like that.

This seems to be a common problem with many (tele)lenses. Even with the circulating masses of presumable "soft copies" of Canon's 100-400. Mostly the issues are behind the camera not attached to it.

BTW after shooting for years with nothing but Canon 'L' primes (inc the excellent 300/2.8 IS) I was the biggest skeptic of the Tammy but all I can say is that it has surprised me and would choose it over the 100-400 even it it cost a little more.

Interesting. For me the IS and max. 200mm more are not worth the more weight and bigger dimensions compared to my 100-400. At least not worth a replacement.

I think I am going to wait until there is a good Sigma 300/2.8 OS HSM. If it's not coming in 2014 I think the non-OS version with a 1.4x converter attached will already be an improvement compared to the 100-400 and 400/5.6 (a little more reach and f4 wide open).

 

[Dave Williams]

I know many won't agree but to my mind if you're using a TC for more than ten percent of shots you've bought the wrong lens.
Good luck with choice.
Russ

An interesting comment ! 500mm owners seem to stick a TC on their lens most of the time, I do. It's always in the back of your mind, should I have bought the 600?!
That said when I had a 600 I usually had a 1.4 TC on the end of that too but never considered getting the 800mm f5.6

 

[Tim Taylor]

I traded in my Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS at Mifsuds yesterday. They thought there was a fault with the AF but I was fed up and left them to get a warranty repair and bought a 2007 Canon 300mm f2.8 IS. Just had a go at the beach with our high speed terrier. I'm happy I made the right choice. :t:

 

[Roy C]

Can't imagine any other "budget" lens' AF being as fast as Canon's 400/5.6. Just the IS is lacking, otherwise it was the perfect birding lens.
.

I agree, I am the 400/5.6's biggest fan, must have taken 100,000 shots with one over the past 8 years - I bought another one just a few months ago - still have it so can compare directly with the Tammy. Certainly on the 5D3 I am amazed at just how close the Tammy is as far as AF speed goes. Had I not tried a Tammy for myself I would have thought the same as you about 3rd party budget zooms but in my experience this one is head and shoulders above a few others I have tried over the years.

For you I would say that a used Canon 300/2.8 IS could be just right, a big step-up from the 100-400 or 400/5.6 IMHO (still cannot fathom out why I got rid of my 300/2.8 :C ). A good/new Sigma 300/2.8 OS would probably cost more than a used Canon and I doubt if it would be so good but you never know.

 

[Paul Jarvis]

Roy, have you tried the 5d3 on the 400 with a 1.4. Tc I would be interested to see how it compares against the tamron. Thanks.

 

[Roy C]

Roy, have you tried the 5d3 on the 400 with a 1.4. Tc I would be interested to see how it compares against the tamron. Thanks.

Yes I have Paul, I bought both with the idea of just keeping one. IQ wise I think the Tammy at 560mm-600mm has got the edge and it certainly is faster focusing on the 5D3 than the 400/5.6 combo (as you would expect for f6.3 v f8)
Although the 400/5.6 + 1.4x tc (canon) focuses fine on the 5D3 it is a bit limited with only the centre point. I have found on the 5D3 that zone AF (with the right customization) is brilliant for BIF but the option is not available for the 400 combo (f8).
One big plus to me for the 400/5.6 is the weight so I am still undecided but leaning towards keeping the Tammy.