Hi,

I'm planning on buying a telephoto lens and I was thinking about the sigma 135-400 or sigma 170-500 (so my budget is around $500). On http://www.photozone.de the sigma 135-400 got a better grade. I'm mainly interested in taking pictures (4x6) during day time. Is there a significant difference between these two lenses for 4x6 pictures?

Stefaan Delcroix

-- Stefaan Delcroix (delcroix@uwyo.edu), February 17, 2002

Answers

For daytime shooting and 4x6 prints the biggest difference between these lenses will be 100mm at the long end and the price. The optical performance should be just about the same.

Keep in mind though that in addition to increasing the focal length 25% (400 to 500) lens movement (camera shake) is also increased by the same amount. You will need a good tripod with either.

Dick

-- Richard Tope (RTope@yahoo.com), February 18, 2002.

I owned the Sigma 170-400 at one time but returned it. The focusing of this lens is pretty slow, especially if you are used to Canon's USM lenses. My lens also had compatibility problems as it hadn't been chipped to work on my EOS30/Elan7. If you do go for it make sure it works on your body, and that it is quick enough for you. The same may apply to the 170-500? I didn't get as far as image quality.

-- canonlover (canoneosd60@aol.com), February 18, 2002.

Hi,

I have the Sigma 135-400 and have taken lots of beautiful pictures with it - even handheld without a tripod or monopod though not recommended. The only complain is the lack of a locking mechanism on the zooming ring because when fully extended at 400mm with a 2X teleconverter it is hell of a long lens :)!

-- Kevin Chooi (kevchooi@yahoo.com), February 18, 2002.

Well, I was sitting on the flight-line at the Oshkosh Airshow (World's biggest) and my friend had an EOS 300 with 170-500mm Sigma. I told him to have his spare EOS 500 with Sigma 28-200 ready as well. I had an EOS 50E and Tokina 80-400. Result? He took far more photos with the short lens whilst I coped with just the one. This of course is a particular situation but I would observe that the 170mm minimum of the , otherwise lovely, Sigma really is rather long for many applications. David

-- David Money (d.money@dmwl.co.nz), February 18, 2002.