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="a.dancy" data-source="post: 1326964" data-attributes="member: 25708">I have had the benefit of using the Canon 300f2.8 (I have used several:t<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> and it is not noticeably sharper than the Sigma though agreed it is better. My view is that many would find it difficult to discern between the two lenses IMHO.:smoke: My only concern regarding getting a secondhand non IS Canon would be for obtaining parts should repair be required. I know that Canon no longer have parts for repairing the 500f4.5. If Canon can give any kind of assurance as to how long parts will be available then subject to price of the lens that would be the way to go.As I have stated before if you feel you need reach you are better served with a longer lens than using a 2X converter routinely, whether with a Canon or a Sigma. My backing up the Sigma prime is based on the fact that it does produce stunning images which are razor sharp and would in my view very easily fall into Canon's 'L' series category if the lens were made by Canon. It is just my opinion. However, in trying to reach a solution to the original question we are met with a dilema, that is, trying to turn a 300 lens into a 600 in the vain hope that real/outstanding quality can be achieved. It can't:-C but acceptable and publishable quality results can be achieved with both lenses using a 2X converter:t:. I would agree that the Canon will outperform the Sigma but it some how makes you think you should dismiss the sigma and throw it in the bin. Not so in my view.Sadly I do not get the chance to photograph birds as often as I would like so I do not have a raft of shots with varying combinations so selecting shots for demonstration isn't easy, made worse by having 5 lenses :eek!:. I am not prolific, but if you go out with the attitude of getting the best out of your equipment and try to make every shot count then I would take that over the being slightly sloppy and relying on IS or whatever. Not that we do of course.The two grebe shots attached are shot using a 2X converter. the first is a 50+% crop at 1/80th sec, the other is full frame. The full frame shot of each would easily make an A4 print or larger. They are both adequately sharp. If you want them sharper then I feel your enjoyment doesn't come from bird photography but from something else. Just to add more fuel to the fire they are shot in jpeg (less sharp)  and I only have elements2 for processing so use your imagination to judge how much better they could have been.Thanks for the compliment CCR11 but in truth I am not that good a photographer there are others a little more gifted than me on this forum. I am speaking more for amateur plod who wants to enjoy taking decent pictures who might feel that they can't get their foot in the door unless they have a the best. Get the best if you can afford but don't think you need it , because you don't. CheersADps I stuck the crane head shot in just for the shear hell of it. It is a captive bird and the crop is huge just to show Sigmas' best lenses are not made from recycled bottles:king: Don't forget to enlarge each picture and check Exif data.</blockquote>

Verification