Could somebody help me narrow down a good 400-500mm lens?

I am looking to purchase a good quality 400-500mm lense for a canon body. It does not have to be a prime lense (I like the versatility of a zoom) but I will consider one if the positives outweigh the negatives. I have researched the 100-400mm canon, the 50-500mm sigma, the 80-400mm sigma and some of canon's primes (400mm , 500mm) and have come away with no outright winner to date. Obviously the primes show better picture quality and can be much faster, but price is a factor, and I think the primes are just a little too steep for an amatuer like myself. That said i would like to create a portfolio that has marketable potential in the future. I am mostly thinking of using this lense for animals and nature work, not so much sports and high movement. I take alot of pictures of bucks and wild game from tree stands and blinds that I hope to sell to some hunting magazines in the future (I have some huge bucks 12-18 point monsters living right in my back yard) I am hoping to keep expenses under $1000.00, but will go as high as $3000 if the extra money is absolutely necessary to capture the quality images I need.

Also, i was wondering if their was a certain camera body that takes pictures silently. I hate startling the animals. Currently I use a Canon eos 3 film camera (I know how horrible it is that I am still stuck on the ancient practice of film, but I love slides).

Thanks for reading....

Bronzeback.



Spring comes like a fool, babbling and strewing flowers.

Bronzeback: although the review tests showed only slight optical advantage from primes, in reality prime lenses are much much sharper.
I have this 100-400 USM IS but again, if I am allowed to choose again, I will buy the 400/5.6 USM again. I heard there is an IS version so you can probably wait.
As for 50-500, it is a surprsingly sharp and versatile lens.

Thanks Markk, I agree the primes are quite noticeably sharper and for some reason the "bokah" and color just seem to be warmer and more eye pleasing than with zooms. It is just the price and the inconvenience of not being able to compose the picture as easily as with a zoom lense. I still haven't decided yet on a clear winner. I am hopping for some more advice from some photographers on this web site. Til then, I will continue to peruse reviews and sample pictures from all the telephoto lenses available for my Canon eos 3.

Bronzeback.

You should consider the Tamron SP 200-500mm.
I'm getting good sharp results with it.
Street 850 £/€
There are reviews on the net.
If you like, I'll send you some examples.

Csiems

I have a Tamron 200-500 that I'm thinking about replacing because, for me, it's just too slow for early/late and under overcast/rainy skies.

I, like you had a Tamron 200-500 and even though I did get some fantastic results with it, the normal result was not great. I am waiting to get a Canon EF 500 f4 - hopefully after Easter. I think and from all I have read and all the advice I have received it is best to go for a prime and if possible a Canon or Nikon prime (depending on the mark you use). In the meantime I got a EF 300 f4 and again it is fantastic - most of the images are great, not soft but crisp.