Believe it or not, 5D3 user misses the 300D reach...

[rpt]

I miss the reach of my 300D and the 100-400L. With that combination I thought I got 640 mm focal length. Then I bought the 5D3. And the 400 mm seems to be - well, 400 mm! So I decided to get back to Rithmetic. Well, 400 x 1.4 = 560. 5.6 x 1.4 = 7.84! Wow! that is less than f8. And hopefully, Canon will deliver next year - meaning 2013 on f8 focus.

Now There is the Sigma 150-500 that is a f5-6.3!

So the question is, should I get:

• The 1.4x III extender for my 100-400L
• The Sigma 150-500 mm lens. I intend to keep the 100-400L.

What experience do you have on the Canon 100-400L + 1.4x
                           OR
The sigma 150-500 mm Lens

Thanks in advance.

Regards,

Rustom

[RLPhoto]

I sold my 7D recently and I miss the reach sometimes. I was contemplating a 200mm F/2 sometime in the near future with a set of extenders.

I'll wait until the 7D2 is released before I consider another crop camera.

[neuroanatomist]

You need to do some more Rithmetic.   

The 300D at 400mm gives you a 640mm FF-equivalent FoV, and a 6.3 MP image.  The 5DIII at 400mm gives you a 400mm FoV, and a 22 MP image.  If you crop the 5DIII image to the 640mm FoV, you'll have an 8.6 MP image with better IQ than the 300D image.

As I've said before, the 'crop factor' reach is an illusion when it comes to IQ - the only thing you're usually giving up is MP in the final image...and in the case of an old APS-C camera like the 300D, you're actually gaining MP with the cropped FF image.

[TexPhoto]

2nd on that.  The apparent 1.6X crop of the crop bodies is not a free extender.  FF pixels are in general better quality pixels, and when you crop the FF to the crop sensor size, the photos compare quite well.

That said, a crop body can make a great 2nd body, a back-up to a new FF.  For hose upgrading, I think it is worth holding onto your crop body, vs an eBay sale.

[dolina]

I have a working 10D, in terms of features is superior to your 300D. I am more than willing to accept in trade for your 5D3 even if it does not work with 800mm 

I miss the reach of my 300D and the 100-400L. With that combination I thought I got 640 mm focal length. Then I bought the 5D3. And the 400 mm seems to be - well, 400 mm! So I decided to get back to Rithmetic. Well, 400 x 1.4 = 560. 5.6 x 1.4 = 7.84! Wow! that is less than f8. And hopefully, Canon will deliver next year - meaning 2013 on f8 focus.

Now There is the Sigma 150-500 that is a f5-6.3!

So the question is, should I get:

• The 1.4x III extender for my 100-400L
• The Sigma 150-500 mm lens. I intend to keep the 100-400L.

What experience do you have on the Canon 100-400L + 1.4x
                           OR
The sigma 150-500 mm Lens

Thanks in advance.

Regards,

Rustom

[rpt]

I sold my 7D recently and I miss the reach sometimes. I was contemplating a 200mm F/2 sometime in the near future with a set of extenders.

I'll wait until the 7D2 is released before I consider another crop camera.

I'll wait probably a few years after the 7D2 is released. Like I said before, I spent all my moolah on the 5D3...

Good to know somebody thinks like me - but from your perspective I would not take it as a compliment

[rpt]

You need to do some more Rithmetic.   

The 300D at 400mm gives you a 640mm FF-equivalent FoV, and a 6.3 MP image.  The 5DIII at 400mm gives you a 400mm FoV, and a 22 MP image.  If you crop the 5DIII image to the 640mm FoV, you'll have an 8.6 MP image with better IQ than the 300D image.

As I've said before, the 'crop factor' reach is an illusion when it comes to IQ - the only thing you're usually giving up is MP in the final image...and in the case of an old APS-C camera like the 300D, you're actually gaining MP with the cropped FF image.

True. Mentally I was at 18MP but holding on to my 300D - sorry about the confusion. Never mind. 1.4 x III or 150-500? Who do you vote for? Currently I have the 5D3 - so 22.3 MP applies to everything...

[neuroanatomist]

1.4 x III or 150-500? Who do you vote for?

1.4x III, IMO. AF will be better, I suspect IQ will be better, too.  I'm happy with the 1.4xIII + 100-400L on my 1D X.

[rpt]

I have a working 10D, in terms of features is superior to your 300D. I am more than willing to accept in trade for your 5D3 even if it does not work with 800mm 

I miss the reach of my 300D and the 100-400L. With that combination I thought I got 640 mm focal length. Then I bought the 5D3. And the 400 mm seems to be - well, 400 mm! So I decided to get back to Rithmetic. Well, 400 x 1.4 = 560. 5.6 x 1.4 = 7.84! Wow! that is less than f8. And hopefully, Canon will deliver next year - meaning 2013 on f8 focus.

Now There is the Sigma 150-500 that is a f5-6.3!

So the question is, should I get:

• The 1.4x III extender for my 100-400L
• The Sigma 150-500 mm lens. I intend to keep the 100-400L.

What experience do you have on the Canon 100-400L + 1.4x
                           OR
The sigma 150-500 mm Lens

Thanks in advance.

Regards,

Rustom

What can I say? As far as I can compute 300D = 10D * 30

so 300D > 10D algebraically.

[rpt]

1.4 x III or 150-500? Who do you vote for?

1.4x III, IMO. AF will be better, I suspect IQ will be better, too.  I'm happy with the 1.4xIII + 100-400L on my 1D X.

Cool. Thanks.

[jthomson]

So the question is, should I get:

• The 1.4x III extender for my 100-400L
• The Sigma 150-500 mm lens. I intend to keep the 100-400L.

What experience do you have on the Canon 100-400L + 1.4x
                           OR
The sigma 150-500 mm Lens

Thanks in advance.

Regards,

Rustom

I got a sigma 150-500mm as my first long telephoto lens.  I still have it and use it for airshows where the zoom is a big advantage, but the IQ doesn't compare to my Canon 400mm f5.6L.  I can crop to better image quality with the 400mm and  the IQ using a Kenko 300 1.4x on the 400mm is still better than the Sigma

I think you would be better getting the 1.4x converter, than the Sigma 150-500mm.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I ended up selling my 7D merely because I got better real world IQ with the 5D MK III. 
When photographing moving wildlife in lower light at 400mm with a 7D, I needed 1/1000 sec shutter, and very high ISO which ate up the detail.  With the 5D MK II, I can set the high ISO and not lose as much detail, so when all is said and done, the Image IQ is better.
You can AF with a 7D or 5D MK II / III at f/8 with a Kenko 1.4X TC, so in really good light, the 7D does have a slight advantage, I just was seldom in that situation.

[Kernuak]

So the question is, should I get:

• The 1.4x III extender for my 100-400L
• The Sigma 150-500 mm lens. I intend to keep the 100-400L.

What experience do you have on the Canon 100-400L + 1.4x
                           OR
The sigma 150-500 mm Lens

Thanks in advance.

Regards,

Rustom

I got a sigma 150-500mm as my first long telephoto lens.  I still have it and use it for airshows where the zoom is a big advantage, but the IQ doesn't compare to my Canon 400mm f5.6L.  I can crop to better image quality with the 400mm and  the IQ using a Kenko 300 1.4x on the 400mm is still better than the Sigma

I think you would be better getting the 1.4x converter, than the Sigma 150-500mm.

There's also the extra weight to factor in, there's a reason the 150-500mm is called the Bigma . That in itself will potentially degrade IQ if handholding (which is usual for the most common use of birds in flight). There are some that insist that the Sigma has better IQ than the 100-400m, but most reviews indicate otherwise. Even those who state on forums that the 150-500 is sharper though, concede the point on contrast. However, whether the 100-400 would still have better contrast with the 1.4 extender is debatable, I never actually tried it on my 100-400 before I sold it, let alone performed any comparisons.

[kubelik]

So the question is, should I get:

• The 1.4x III extender for my 100-400L
• The Sigma 150-500 mm lens. I intend to keep the 100-400L.

What experience do you have on the Canon 100-400L + 1.4x
                           OR
The sigma 150-500 mm Lens

Thanks in advance.

Regards,

Rustom

I got a sigma 150-500mm as my first long telephoto lens.  I still have it and use it for airshows where the zoom is a big advantage, but the IQ doesn't compare to my Canon 400mm f5.6L.  I can crop to better image quality with the 400mm and  the IQ using a Kenko 300 1.4x on the 400mm is still better than the Sigma

I think you would be better getting the 1.4x converter, than the Sigma 150-500mm.

I also had the Sigma 150-500 as my first telephoto lens and used it with my 30D.  the bokeh is really very terrible, although I didn't know it until I started using a 70-200 f2.8 + 2x extender on my 5D Mark II instead.  note that when I crop into my 5D Mark II frame I can get the same effective MP/focal length as on my 30D, so if anything, it gives me more options.  I've sold my 30D, but I haven't sold the 150-500 as I actually feel sort of bad giving this to any of my friends, it's really a weak lens.

[sdsr]

Leaving aside the benefits of cropping on a full-frame camera as mentioned by others, you might want to consider the revised "Bigma" instead of the 150-500.  I was all set to buy a 100-400L, but something made me consider the Sigma 50-500 and after reading more than a few favorable reviews and discussions of it online (which suggest/show that it beats their 150-500 and 120-400) I rented one from lensrentals a couple of weeks ago and liked it enough to buy one (in lensrentals' Black Friday sale, luckily).  It took me a while to get used to the weight, but I was pleasantly surprised by how good the OS is (avoid the previous version, which, among other drawbacks, has no stabilization at all) and, even more, by the precision of its focusing - on objects both close and far.  It's not the last word in sharpness, but you wouldn't expect that in a 50-500 lens and I think it compares well to the Canon 100-400 in that regard (and, unless there was something wrong with the 100-400 I rented, beats the Canon handily in terms of bokeh; better image stabilization too, as you might expect from a much more recent lens).  So you may want to try one yourself and see what you think.