photo sharing and upload picture albums photo forums search pictures popular photos photography help login
All Cameras >> Sigma >> Sigma 135-400mm f/4.5-5.6 Aspherical

Sigma 135-400mm f/4.5-5.6 Aspherical Lens Sample Photos

Lens: 135-400mm f/4.5
Random Sigma 135-400mm f/4.5-5.6 Aspherical Samples from 1034 available Photos more
g3/53/626353/3/55639765.20DPicsDisk4IMG_2683.jpg v3/74/500174/3/46546518.DSC_8179.jpg g4/05/670505/3/63734012.8eKotESL.jpg u49/tim32225/medium/35718202.IMG_18366Aci800.jpg
u13/neil_marsh/medium/41585251.IMG_6009.jpg g1/43/785543/3/115375119.deCKuJPb.jpg u17/tim32225/medium/39153869.IMG_21166Aci70.jpg g4/53/626353/3/59706787.TodayIMG_3757.jpg
g4/74/500174/3/63787106.EpHzlJnN.jpg g3/74/500174/3/95238754.3TBpDlaS.jpg v3/74/500174/3/44756087.DSC_7152.jpg g9/74/1116774/3/152351447.suFFMxSq.jpg

Tim Rucci09-Oct-2007 21:02
Sigma 135-400 Lens

I used this lens for about a year and a half on a Canon 10D, mostly for birding and other outdoor subjects. This lens is very sharp, and was rated as one of Sigma's best lenses at the time it first came out. It was also awarded the editors choice as one of tbe best new lenses by one of the photography magazines. I purchased it for it's good optics and good value for the money. I was happy with it for the most part, but I did miss some shots due to the lack of image stabilization at times when the available light didn't allow enough shutter speed to avoid the blur caused by camera shake when used at full zoom. You need good light and enough shutter speed to overcome this limitation. You can get good results mounting it on a monopod or tripod, and is not very heavy considering the amount of zoom it provides.

The lens does suffer from lens creep when it's carried on a neck strap and this proved annoying at times (the zoom sometimes extends on it's own due to gravity, because there is no tension adjustment on the zoom, and no locking pin). The lens comes in a very nice carrying case with a strap and a lens hood, which costs extra on some other lenses.

I ended up replacing this lens with a Canon 100-400L IS lens, at about 3 times the price, and still use that lens now, along with several others. I was able to sell the Sigma 135-400 for $70 less than what I paid for it after about 1 1/2 years of use.

My advice to someone considering this lens would be to go for the Canon 100-400 instead if you can afford it. If you are on a budget, the Sigma 135-400 is a decent choice, or you can split the difference with the newer Sigma 80-400, which also has image stabilization for about $400 more.

You can see some examples of photos taken with this lens in my pbase galleries:
Guest 07-Jan-2007 09:57
i wanted to buy this lens anymore comments..good or bad about this lens?
Guest 22-Jun-2006 22:48
This is a much over looked lens. It's very sharp if you can get a good copy. It's a lot of lens considering it's price. It's well built and heavy too. It's a shame that it doesn't have an image stabiliser.
The tripod collar is a welcome inclusion (also fits the sigma 70-200 f2.8).
It's only real problem is it's weak AF, it's slow and noisy. HSM would be nice too.

All photos are copyrighted and may not be used without permission from the photographer.
These photos are are a guide to what these cameras are capable of, but may not fully represent the camera due to post-processing, scanning, or photographic technique.
All brands are trademarked by their owners.
These pages are not sponsored or approved by the manufacturers.
Other content Copyright © 2003,2004,2005,2006, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Contact to contribute data or photos of cameras.