Wildlife & sports tele: DA*300 vs Sigma 100-300 f4

[dspdx]

I want a long and reasonably fast telephoto for wildlife photos and sports. I'm wrestling with the merits of going with the DA*300 (presumably sharper, weatherproof, lighter) versus a Sigma EX 100-300 f4 (good quality build, zoom flexibility/fewer lens changes). A robust build matters since I like to hike and will be taking the lens to the jungle and mountains. The DA*300 is designed for tough environments, but I wonder how much this is offset by the need to change lenses. As for the Sigma, I wonder how much less durable it is and how much the weight & size will bother me (51 vs 38 oz). The prices of these are not much different.

A final thought, is either long enough? Will a teleconverter be a wise addition?

Thanks for your thoughts.

Drew

[AdrianM]

I have had the Sigma 100-300 f4 since April (based on recommendation of friend who is a Canon owner) and use it for both birds (usually with a 1.4x TC) and my son's soccer games. For sports it is great and I usually use it without the TC, but it really depends on how close you can get to the side of the field. It is not light, and I would probably think twice about taking it on a really long or arduous hike. When I walked the Kokoda trail in July, I left it at home and took a Tamron 18-250. The 1.4 TC can be used on this lens with no really observable drop off in performance, but it does drop your max aperture to 5.6 and chasing birds tends to get a bit harder. Regardless, this is a great sharp lens and would be a wonderful addition to any stable. I have posted a recent photo using this lens in sports ("night football") taken with my new K20D. If you want to see the photographs of my Canon friend, look up doogs38 in pbase - many of the aircraft photographs were taken with this lens (for example 77SQN Historical Flight 2 Jun 06 photo - Doogs38 photos at pbase.com).

[Lowell Goudge]

Originally Posted by dspdx

I want a long and reasonably fast telephoto for wildlife photos and sports. I'm wrestling with the merits of going with the DA*300 (presumably sharper, weatherproof, lighter) versus a Sigma EX 100-300 f4 (good quality build, zoom flexibility/fewer lens changes). A robust build matters since I like to hike and will be taking the lens to the jungle and mountains. The DA*300 is designed for tough environments, but I wonder how much this is offset by the need to change lenses. As for the Sigma, I wonder how much less durable it is and how much the weight & size will bother me (51 vs 38 oz). The prices of these are not much different.

A final thought, is either long enough? Will a teleconverter be a wise addition?

Thanks for your thoughts.

Drew

I use a sigma 70-200 F2.8 with 1.4 and 2x TCS, lens is similar in size to the 100-300 F4 and with the 1.4 X TC is basically identical. Heavy you bet but it is extremely durable. I have had mine for 4 1/2 years. never had an issue.

[koper]

pentax 300 DA F4 are good lenses
in the market dose not exist good teleconverter till now
i would bay pentax lenses and wait for a good teleconverter

[dspdx]

I appreciate the feedback. It's a tough decision to spend $1K or so without knowing what will suit me best. I'm going to hedge this by renting a DA*300 (no place to rent the Sigma).

I like the 70-200 2.8 option. It should have more uses than just wildlife.