BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rapala" data-source="post: 3502695" data-attributes="member: 119536">Hello all,I am looking to upgrade my camera and lens from my current Canon 650D (T4i) and Sigma 100-300 f/4. I have been relatively happy with this combo but there are aspects of it that I would like to improve.My issues with this combo include:Sharpness is not greatAF tends to hunt and has difficulty tracking birds.Buffer on T4i fills quickly when shooting RAWPoor mid/high ISO performance I have considered my options and have narrowed my search to two lenses, the Canon 400 f/5.6L and the Nikon 200-500 f/5.6. Not too often do people consider swapping systems entirely and I have found it difficult comparing these two lenses. Both of these lenses seem to be very popular and perform very well. Obviously, the Nikon lens would require jumping ship and switching over to a Nikon body. Here are some of my thoughts and feel free to add your own.Nikon 200-500 f/5.6 ED VRPros:More reach (500mm)Image Stabilization (VR)Close-focus of 7.2 feetNew technology (2015)Flexibility of a zoomVery good IQ and sharpnessCons:More expensive (~$1200 used)Big and heavy (~5lb)- Perhaps requiring support?Switching to Nikon bodyCanon 400 f/5.6LPros:Cheap (~$800 used)Lightweight and certainly handholdable (~2.75lb)Very good IQ and sharpnessFast focussingCons:Close-focus of 11ftLess reach than NikonOlder technology (1993)I would almost certainly go for the Nikon if it did not weigh 5lbs. My Sigma 100-300 f/4 weighs 3.5lb and that is not lightweight after long periods of handheld shooting. My major concern is the handholdability of this lens, even with VR. Is it difficult to manage or is it easy to get used to? I do much of my shooting handheld while walking, and a tripod would not suit this shooting style. Is it even possible to handhold this lens while birding and walking? Just another concern, $1200 is near the limit of my lens upgrade budget and I know that a quality tripod/head can quickly get pricey and push that price higher.My main concern with the Canon is the close-focus distance. It can be fairly easy for birds to approach closer than ten feet and it is frustrating when I simply cannot focus on a bird. Should the close-focus distance be of concern to me or do those of you with experience with this lens not find it a drawback? Is an additional 100m and 7ft MFD worth an extra $400?Both of these lenses have a maximum aperture of 5.6, which is a drawback to me since bright and sunny days are somewhat uncommon where I live. This is where ISO performance comes into play, but I'll get to that with camera bodies once I decide on a lens.In conclusion, feel free to share any photos and experience with these lenses as I would greatly appreciate your input. I have also included this thread in the Nikon forum to get opinions from both sides of the photography community. Thank you for your thoughts and for taking the time to read this thread. Or for skimming it at the least <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" />.</blockquote>

Verification