Wildlife Lens

[fats]

OP Says:
"Hi all, I have a Canon 300 f4 and Canon 1.4 TC I use on my 50D for wildlife but are now thinking about going to a Sigma 150-500 and 1.4 to give a bit more on the long end any points of view are most welcome Regards Dave"

Yep, its official, I am an idiot.

In that case, if extra length is the goal, is the 100-400 or the 400 F5.6 really a consideration? They are both shorter than the current setup.

I am particularly curious because I am currenly shopping in this range myself. I have pretty much ruled out the 400 because I want IS too much. I have had a play with the 100-400 and the 300 F4 + 1.4 TC and, to me, the 300+TC blew the zoom out of the water. It was noticibly faster, lighter and had a slight advatage on reach. I just need to decide if i want the flexability 100-400.

[enduro]

In that case, if extra length is the goal, is the 100-400 or the 400 F5.6 really a consideration? They are both shorter than the current setup.

I am particularly curious because I am currenly shopping in this range myself. I have pretty much ruled out the 400 because I want IS too much. I have had a play with the 100-400 and the 300 F4 + 1.4 TC and, to me, the 300+TC blew the zoom out of the water. It was noticibly faster, lighter and had a slight advatage on reach. I just need to decide if i want the flexability 100-400.

300x1.4 = 420 so the advantage on reach is only really slight. That combo is an excellent combo for wildlife an you have AF too!

If I had that setup I don't think I'd be looking at a 400mm prime or 100-400mm unless I had some specific tasks that I needed it to perform.

As far as I can recall, the only next telefocals are the 500mm, 600mm etc.

[fats]

Hmmm, I might have to start a thread soon asking some of my own specific questions.

As for the original question, I would stick with what you have unless you can afford something that is longer AND of at least the same quality as what you already have. That is a very uneducated opinion though.