I would like a longer lens

[donoreo]

My longest lens at the moment is the Canon 55-250 IS (old non-STM).  It is a decent lens for the money but I would like to get something a bit longer and overall better. 

I am considering a Tamron 70-300MM F4.5.6 DI VC LENS which gets very good reviews (beats both mine and the STM version) except wider than f/8 at 300mm. 

Unless I win a lottery I will never have L series lenses. 

I know that 300 is not much more than I have now.  The next step would be a Sigma 150-500. 

Opinions? 

[Oldboy]

The Sigma 150-500mm F4-6.3 is a cracking lens but you do need good light to get the best from it. On a grey day in woods you would struggle to get focus at the F6.3 end. If most of your photographs are taken in bright conditions then go for it. I have a friend who uses the Sony version of this lens and has taken cracking shots with it. If on the other hand light isn't good when you do your shooting then the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX DG OS HSM - Canon Fit might be the better option. This can be used with the 1.4 or 2x Sigma converters giving you a 280mm F4 or a 400mm 5.6 at the long end. Both of the lenses have OS(Optical Stabilizer) which helps when hand holding the lens. My walkabout lens is the Nikon 70-200mm F2.8 VR II plus Nikon 1.4 Converter as I find this the best combination in most situations. 

[DigiDiva]

I craved a bigger lens and now I have one, although I really love it, it's very restrictive. Being specifically for wildlife, which I struggle with because of health issues (sitting still for long periods of time, getting down low and worse, getting back up again), Im not gonna get my money's worth.

Think about the kind of photography you want to do or love to do, and invest in a lens or other equipment to suit that. Or better still, try hiring the bigger one first. Though this is 'dead money', it might save you in the long run if you realise a big lens isn't what you really needed.

But I am in love with my big lens and wouldn't sell her.

[donoreo]

I really do not know what to do.  I find my 250mm is often not enough.  The Sigma 70-200 does not give me more and it is $1200.  The teleconverters are $250 each.  Not the kind of money I can spend (and not get in trouble if you know what I mean) and mentally that is more than I can handle (even though I could actually spend it - wife aside!). 

[DigiDiva]

Difficult decision and I would look at how important wildlife photography means to you and let that lead you into the decision.

[Oldboy]

I really do not know what to do.  I find my 250mm is often not enough.  The Sigma 70-200 does not give me more and it is $1200.  The teleconverters are $250 each.  Not the kind of money I can spend (and not get in trouble if you know what I mean) and mentally that is more than I can handle (even though I could actually spend it - wife aside!).

Try looking at the secondhand market. 

[Simple]

See if you can get hold of a second hand Sigma50-500.  Yes it is restrictive with its f6.3 at 500mm but ISO performance on DSLR is becoming better with every model and reasonable shutter speeds can be obtained by upping your ISO. Together with better noise reduction tools in editing software it is possible to get some excellent results in more challenging light conditions. Go long - Go Bigma.

[DigiDiva]

Mines a sigma, prefer it to my tamron which takes so long to  autofocus that the birds have migrated by it gets settled. Thats my 70 to 300 but my sigma 150 -500 is great. I only managed to buy it because  it was on interest free credit!

[donoreo]

The problem with the secondhand market here is that there is not much in the lenses I want.  I would rather be able to see and try out the lens first and buy from retail, not someone online. 

[hssutton]

Don, bite the bullet. The Sigma 50-500mm is pretty good. I used one for a few years, but it fails miserably when the light fails. I've never ever regretted Ebaying it and buying the Canon 100-400L. Believe me when I say you won't regret it either. You know it makes sense

Harry

[DigiDiva]

Try a lens hire

[donoreo]

Don, bite the bullet. The Sigma 50-500mm is pretty good. I used one for a few years, but it fails miserably when the light fails. I've never ever regretted Ebaying it and buying the Canon 100-400L. Believe me when I say you won't regret it either. You know it makes sense

Harry

The 100-400 would be ideal, but there is no way I would buy one new.  I have never seen one used.  Even the Sigma 50-500 is $1300 used! 

[2Beers]

you could get a grey import on the 100-400 for around $1800 Canadian

[donoreo]

I explained my whole problem to my wife and laid out that maybe a used 70-200 f/4 L USM with a teleconverter (1.4 or 2 X) would be good.  She said "if you figure out the best route and the best price, then that is what to do". 

I am not sure what game she is playing, but I am cautious now!

[Alfonso_Frisk]

I explained my whole problem to my wife and laid out that maybe a used 70-200 f/4 L USM with a teleconverter (1.4 or 2 X) would be good.  She said "if you figure out the best route and the best price, then that is what to do". 

I am not sure what game she is playing, but I am cautious now!

In that case you go for a new Sigma 50-500.