Zoom Comparison.

[Bill Taka]

After much research and alot of speculation I find it hard to believe that there isn't a good review between the Canon 100-400 and the Sigma (Bigma) 50-500 actually being used on the XL (specifically XLH1) series. These lenses seem to be the best for what they accomplish especially the wildife shooter. Is there anyone that has compared the 2 specifically at 400mm for sharpness, contrast, distortion etc. I would say looking on a HD monitor, the average viewer could not tell the difference - speculating of course.

[Alkim Un]

Originally Posted by Bill Taka

After much research and alot of speculation I find it hard to believe that there isn't a good review between the Canon 100-400 and the Sigma (Bigma) 50-500 actually being used on the XL (specifically XLH1) series. These lenses seem to be the best for what they accomplish especially the wildife shooter. Is there anyone that has compared the 2 specifically at 400mm for sharpness, contrast, distortion etc. I would say looking on a HD monitor, the average viewer could not tell the difference - speculating of course.

bill,

these lenses are not the best for XLH1. I ve used 100-400 with XL2 for 1 year, made 6 documentary films for broadcast, but I m not satisfied. with XLH1, resolution drops more because of high pixel count with same 1/3" sensor. even dont think sigma 50-500, with photo camera that lens is just fine but with XLH1's crop and high resolution, you can detect the degrataion. we have very limited tele zoom options here for XLH1. these are sigma 100-300 f/4, sigma 120/300 f/2.8, and nikon 200-400 f/4. also sigma's today announcement lens 200-500 f2.8 . it is huge and heavy but may be the best super-tele alternative.it has 178 mm front lens like a volcano mouth :), here is the link;

http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/index.htm

I m planning to buy XLH1 next autumn, and think to buy sigma 120-300 or any new canon tele zoom that will be announced this summer, like 100-400 f/4 DO..

regards,
alkim.

[Tony Davies-Patrick]

The Sigma 200-500mm f/2.8...looks like a nice cheap and lightweight option for me carrying my prime 300mm & 600mm fast Nikkors ha, Ha! I'll just buy a larger vehicle to move it around in and a couple of extra Sherpas to take with me on location!

It'll be interesting to see the images produced with the new heavy-weight Sigma and if they match the quality of the earlier 120-300mm zoom lens.

Anybody know the weight and price tag of this Sigma monster? Cheaper than the Nikkor 1200-1700mm f/5.6 I'm sure, but I bet the Sigma will still stretch the bank balance...

[Alkim Un]

my guess or wish is 7000-8000 $ and 7-8 kg. if it exceeds these price range, it will be a new toy for the arabian prince :)

[Dale Guthormsen]

As far as i am concerned, 8000 for a lens may as well be 8,000,000. Unless I find out I am of Arab decendancy and inherit kazillions.
From all the research I have done, the sigma 100 to 300 is about the best buy on the market the cost/quality ratio. I intend to add that to the arsenal this coming month. If I come into some extra cash it will be the 2.8 equivalent.