Shooting a 300 f2.8 along side a 'big' prime?

postcardcv

postcardcv

Messages
2,661
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
No
I'm struggling with the temptation to buy a 300 f2.8 so need some help...

I already have a 500 f4 that I use when out birding and a 100-400 for days out when birding isn't the main aim. I'm considering getting either a Sigma 300 f2.8 prime or the new 120-300 f2.8 OS, unfortunately I can't afford the Canon. However I cannot quite work out when I'd use it... even though it weighs a lot less than the 500 I know I would alway take the 500 when birding as I love the lens and the extra reach is worth having. I also can't see it replacing the 100-400 as it would be much more weight to carry when out with the family. The prime would be no good for me on these days as I use the short end of the 100-400 a lot for shooting the kids.

So my issue is I want a 300 f2.8, but I can't work out why!!! So does any one out there shoot with a 300 f2.8 alongside one of the big (500/600) primes? If so in what situations do you use the 300 over the 500/600?
 
I had both the Nikon 500f4 and the Sigma 120-300 and found it a great combination. I did pick and choose dependant on the location and what i was expecting to photograph. The Sigma has the 1.4TC attached all the time but is great for hides where you can expect to get close to the action. The 500 was used mainly for very wary species-- peregrines, osprey etc. at the end of the day only you know your shooting style but for me having the zoom of the 120-300 has been invaluable.
 
It is a tough choice... I got offered a great deal on a new 120-300 non-OS a couple of weeks ago and was intending to buy it but it turns out that it is a really poor copy. So I've got a few choices either save up for an OS version, a Sigma 300 prime, an old Canon non-IS 300 f2.8 or buy the dodgy copy of the 120-300 and send it back to Sigma to get sorted. :thinking: should really do the sensible thing and forget them all and stick with what I have.
 
postcardcv said:
....So does any one out there shoot with a 300 f2.8 alongside one of the big (500/600) primes? If so in what situations do you use the 300 over the 500/600?
Click to expand...
I've got the 300/2.8 and 600/4. If I'm seriously chasing brids then it's the 600/4 being lugged around but I'm happy with the 300/2.8 and converters for more casual outings.....family picnic and walks in the woods.

Bob
 
Sold the 800mm and the 500mm and now I am using the 300mm II + either the 1.4x III or the 2x III tele-converters.

I find the IQ to be as good as the 500mm + 1.4x, although not as good as the 800mm but not worse enough to make me miss it.

The advantages are quite a few: weight, size, short MFD, versatility (300mm 2.8, 420mm f4 and 600mm 5.6 combinations). The AF with the version III tele-converters is fast enough with anything I wanted to shoot when used with the focus limiter.

I find myself taking many more shots than when I was currying the 800mm and 500mm around.

The combo is quite a bit better than when I was using the 300mm IS + 2x II as it is as sharp at f6.3 as the MK1 was at f8 and the AF is much faster and accurate with the 2x III.
 
unfortunately the mkII 300 f2.8 is beyond my budget so I'm looking at either a Sigma 300 f2.8 prime or a 120-300 f2.8 OS... I could get the Sigma prime and still keep my 300 f4 which is quite appealling, or if I sold the 300 f4 I could strecth to the 120-300. I do really want to buy the Canon buy I doubt I can find the money even for a mkI IS.
 
Selling the 500mm would bring it within your budget, thus the reason I mentioned it (and this is exactly what I did and I do not regret it for a second!).

BTW the Sigma 120-300 non-OS is generally sharper than the Sigma 300mm prime (based on my tests, reviews, charts and even Sigma's own comments).
You probably tried a bad copy. The 120-300 non-OS non-DG I just got for my wife seems to be almost as sharp as the OS one I sold a few months back.
 
Last edited:
micloi said:
Selling the 500mm would bring it within your budget, thus the reason I mentioned it (and this is exactly what I did and I do not regret it for a second!).

BTW the Sigma 120-300 non-OS is generally sharper than the Sigma 300mm prime (based on my tests, reviews, charts and even Sigma's own comments).
You probably tried a bad copy. The 120-300 non-OS non-DG I just got for my wife seems to be almost as sharp as the OS one I sold a few months back.
Click to expand...

The only problem with that plan is that I would not part with my 500 f4 I'm too attached to it. Good to hear your comments about the non-OS Sigma, I think I'll have to speak to the shop and see if they could get another copy in at the same price.
 
micloi said:
You might find these useful:

Canon 300 II 600mm f6.3
Canon 300mm f4 non-IS at 588mm f8
Sigma 50-500 500mm f6.3
Sigma 120-300mm non-OS non-DG 600mm f6.3

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/16187250/telephoto comparision/Canon 300 II 600mm f6.3.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/16187250/telephoto comparision/Canon 300mm f4 non-IS at 588mm f8 copy.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/16187250/telephoto comparision/Sigma 50-500 500mm f6.3.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/16187250/telephoto comparision/Sigma 120-300mm non DG 600mm f6.3.jpg
Click to expand...

thanks for those samples - were they shot from the same distance? If so it is interesting to see the difference in mag between the first and last shots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top