Best mid-long telephoto lens?

[jtaylor333]

I have a 6D.  My telephoto lens is a 70-200 f/2.8L II and I have a Canon 2X III converter.

I love the 70-200 and am pleased with my image quality but am far less happy with the results with the teleconverter.

I find that 400 mm total is also a little low for wildlife shots and am looking to go longer - somewhere in the 400-800 range.

Options I am considering are:

1. Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L II with my 2X teleconverter (which would make it 200-800 f/9-11).  About $2k

2. Sigma 150-600 f/5-6.3 Contemporary.  About $1k

3. Sigma 150-600 f/5-6.3 Contemporary with 1.4X (which would make it 210-840 f/8).  About $1.4k

My questions relate primarily to image quality.  Which would give me the best IQ at 400mm, 600 mm and 800 mm?

Any other issues to consider?

Many thanks

[ebiggs1]

B from B,

Ya can't save it man. 

[Waddizzle]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

My second thought is to not use any tele converter. Ever!  They help nothing and hurt every time. A better choice is get closer. Getting closer is always preferable to a bigger lenses or converters.  ...

---

Yeah, just tell that bear and her cubs to hold still while you move in for the shot.

---

"Whoop, whoop, whoop.  Wise guy, Moe."

Bears are a lot bigger than birds.  I'd think you could back off by a distance proportional to the relative size of birds to bears.

[ebiggs1]

"I'd think you could back off by a distance proportional to the relative size of birds to bears."

And if you were out shooting bears, I suspect you would take more then a tele converter as equipment.  Just me but I would.

[Waddizzle]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"I'd think you could back off by a distance proportional to the relative size of birds to bears."

And if you were out shooting bears, I suspect you would take more then a tele converter as equipment.  Just me but I would.

---

Even if you are out shooting birds, you had better be prepared for that bear, wolf, rabid raccoon, etc.. That's why, I shoot zoos.

[TTMartin]

---

@jtaylor333 wrote:

My questions relate primarily to image quality.  Which would give me the best IQ at 400mm, 600 mm and 800 mm?

---

A good resource to see the difference between the different lenses and there most definitely is a difference is a website called the-digital-picture.com. They let you compare two lenses with a roll over feature. They also include shots with the teleconverter and different apertures so you can compare the Canon EF 100-400 L IS II with a 1.4X TC (560mm f/8), to the Sigmas and the Tamron at 600mm f/8.

To my eye the Canon (560mm f/8) comes out on top, then the Sigma 150-600 OS Sport (600mm f/8), next is the Sigma 150-600 (600mm f/8), and the Tamron 150-600 (600mm f/8) brings up the rear.

Keep in mind in the above configuration the Canon wont AF on the 6D, and the Sigmas and Tamron will. Again, if you want to do wildlife photography, I would highly recommend you first get a 7D Mk II. Its higher frame rate and superior AF system are a must for wildlife photography in my opinion. 

Below is another photo with the EF 100-400 L IS II + 1.4X TC III taken yesterday. It is about a 50% crop (11.5 megapixels).

7D Mk II, EF 100-400 IS II with Canon 1.4X III, 560mm, 1/1600, f/8, ISO 640, Post processed in Lightroom only (no add-ins)