I’m looking to add a super telephoto lens to my gear bag for an upcoming safari, and wanted to get some feedback from the forum on lens choices. I shoot with a Canon 5D Mark IV and have narrowed it down to 3 options:
1. Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II
2. Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 G2
3. Sigma 150-600mm 5-6.3 Contemporary
Any advice, personal experience folks have with these lenses, or the necessary focal length range for shooting wildlife in Africa would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers!
The Canon 100-400 is an excellent lens. Both the Tamron and Sigma 150-600mm lenses are well regarded, but I think it is fair to say they aren't quite as sharp as the Canon. But, the extra reach is really useful. And, the sharpness falls off mostly at 600mm, I can speak from experience with the Tamron that it is quite good at shorter focal lengths. The flexibility offered by the 150-600mm is virtually unrivaled by any other lens, making it a solid choice. Hope this helps!
Having that extra reach is what's leading me towards the 150-600. The MTF data between the Sigma and Tamron lenses is fairly comparable. If "sharpness falls off mostly at 600mm", then your 600mm shot of the lioness is a good sign of how the other focal lengths resolve detail. I think the next step is taking the Metro North down to B&H for the "in the hands test." This has been helpful -- thanks.
Late to the party, however, I can vouch for the Sigma 150-600. The dock gives the ability to fine tune the lens at multiple apertures and lengths, as I recall. It's not difficult, though it can be time consuming. It is definitely worth it though, and what puts the Sigma above the Tamron (don't think they have that feature). I tuned the lenses a while ago, and on both mine and my husbands. I got the sport, and he has the contemporary. If I had to do it over again, I would just get the contemporary, as you are considering. The sport is much heavier, and in theory, sharper, but there really isn't a discernible difference between the sharpness of the two. The weight difference, however, is huge!
I will say that the autotune using the dock makes a huge difference in the sharpness, so if someone didn't get a chance to tune the Sigma and notices that the lens isn't that sharp, they didn't get the full benefit of the lens. For example, it makes enough difference that if I wanted to go light and use David's contemporary, I would want to borrow the his body, which the lens is tuned to.
I shoot NIkon, and wish Nikon has the dock technology to fine tune zoom lenses like that...
Happy Shooting,
Margaret
I agree with Ian's assessment of the Canon lens. It is superbly sharp and if you want more reach take along one or more of Canon's extenders—1.4 or 2x. I spent three weeks in Africa shooting with that combination and was able to get excellent results. I now use Canon's 200-400 + 1.4 because it is faster, has IS and you can flip the extender on or off easily. If you have time rent the lenses you are considering for a weekend and put them through their paces. See for yourself which one feels right and captures what you want the least distraction. Wildlife photography often requires split second reactions to get "the shot." You can also rent the lens of your choice for your safari for much less than the purchase price.