Canon EF 100-400mm 4.5-5.6 MK II or a Sigma Sports 150-600mm f/5-6.3

[Sholish]

Hello! I’ve been wanting to get a lens better than my current one the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6. And I’ve got it down between 2 lenses, I found both of them used on B&H at similar prices and conditions.

I really don’t know how much more range I really need, and I’m concerned about the sigmas 6.5lbs.

I have considered using an adapter like a 1.4x but it drops the canon down to like an f/8 and I don’t know how much that affects the low-light performance and sharpness.

Thanks!!

[Sholish]

Edit: I do use a Rebel T7 currently but I want to upgrade to a mirrorless body soon like the R7

[ebiggs1]

Well it looks like you better make up your mind first which is more important. The new R7 or get lenses today and use them today. Keep in mind eIther one of the choices you mentioned will adapt to an R7.

Now it comes down to whether you think 400mm FL is enough or do you need the extra 200mm? IMHO, I will always go for the extra 200mm of native FL and never depend upon a tel-con to get it. Either of the lenses mentioned will work well on your T7. Both are relatively big and heavy so that is on you if you can handle it.

Using a tel-con even a 1.4x has penalties more than the simple f-stop reduction. They will cause a slight degrading of the lens IQ as well. They will add albeit small additional weight and length. Plus another lens gadget to keep track of since I doubt you want it on all the time. Also, a 1.4x tel-con will only get you 560mm on a 400mm native lens. Since you are shooting a T7 you will have a nearly 1000mm (960mm) FL equivalent with the big 150-600mm super zoom and that is serious FL in anybodies book

[Sholish]

Thanks for the response!!

I do plan on getting lenses before a newer camera body, and really the only thing I’m concerned about is the sigmas autofocus and sharpness at 600mm, as well as how good it adapts to the newer RF bodies when I do eventually upgrade to one.

[shadowsports]

Greetings,

As Ebiggs1 mentioned, both lenses will adapt and perform well on the R7.  The Canon lens is always a safer bet, but the 150-500 is extremely popular For wildlife.  

Since you are going to replace your lenses with RF at some point, I'd go for the Sigma.  It will give you additional reach and cropping capability.  I know Ebiggs1 had the S model and can attest to its performance.  Note the S is built like a tank and is heavy. You may find a monopod would also be helpful 

[deebatman316]

Your current camera cannot AF with an aperture smaller than F/5.6 but 3rd Parties have found a way around this. But the AF system becomes slow and unreliable. If you use a Canon teleconverter the camera won't AF at all. Only certain DSLR cameras can AF at F/8. Its only the high end DSLRs with large amounts of AF Points such as the 45 point AF system found in older EOS 1D Series cameras and the EOS Rebel T8i/ EOS 850D. 

[Waddizzle]

I recommend the Canon over the Sigma, most especially if you have plans to upgrade to an R Series body. 

The 600mm on a crop sensor body will be tricky to hand hold.  It will be equivalent to a 960mm lens on a full frame camera.  

[p4pictures]

I have the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM lens and also use it with the 1.4x Extender Mk III on my mirrorless cameras. The lens works perfectly with the mirrorless camera's advanced AF capabilities, and also allows the maximum drive speed to be used. In fact this 100-400mm + 1.4x combination works better on the mirrorless than on the DSLR. You may not be able to use autofocus with the EF 100-400mm with the 1.4x extender on some DSLR cameras, but it does work fine on the mirrorless as they don't have the limitation of f/5.6 aperture that some DSLRs do. 

I have not used the Sigma 150-600mm. 

[ebiggs1]

"Your current camera cannot AF with an aperture smaller than F/5.6 but 3rd Parties have found a way around this. But the AF system becomes slow and unreliable."

I am not absolutely sure what he is trying to say but if he is referring the SIgma 150-600mm super zoom it is as reliable as any lens in this type including the 100-400mil. I have owned every mode of the so-called super zooms and found them to be good to very good to excellent. I also owned the 100-400mm first gen and used the newer 2nd gen several times. If you were talking 1st gen 100-400 I would say the SIgam is the better go by far however you are talking the 2nd gen, I think, and that is why I made the comment, "can you live with 400mm or do you need 600mm".

I, too, mostly say go Canon if you can but, IMHO, these two choices are so similar that it does come down to the extra 200mm. Again for me, I will always, I mean always go with extra native FL so I would get the 150-600mm.

And once again for me if I were to buy one of the 150-600mm super zooms today it would be the Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2 and not the SIgma C. The big Tammy is just a tad bit better than the rest of the models out there. Make sure it is the G2 model as the Tamron first model isn't as good.

[ebiggs1]

"The 600mm on a crop sensor body will be tricky to hand hold.  It will be equivalent to a 960mm lens on a full frame camera."

Point already made ....................

"Since you are shooting a T7 you will have a nearly 1000mm (960mm) FL equivalent with the big 150-600mm super zoom and that is serious FL in anybodies book"

However, folks either over come and learn how to use these big lenses or they don't. If they can't handle the requirements of this field of photography they either need to change their subject matter or get a different hobby. Big lenses are two things, big and they can be heavy. That's just how it is. And besides the 960mm equivalent there are more FL clear down to 210mm equivalent.