Sigma 120-300 2.8, really that good?

Laudrup said:
As for the 120-300mm being 99% as good as the 300mm, I'd highly doubt it.
Click to expand...

How can you make that comparison when you have not owned one?

My Sigma 120-300 is as sharp as my Nikon 300 AFS was.
 
The Canon 300 is about as good as it gets for Canon, the 120-300mm is slower to autofocus, less accurate and the QC at Sigma leaves a lot to be desired. It looks a decent lens for the price, but there's a reason it is half the price of the Canikon 300 primes. Plus with a 1.4x TC or 2x TC you can essentially have 3 different lenses.
 
dunganick said:
I've so far owned a 300mm f2.8 (obviously used, but was like new) which was distinctly average. Im not convinced that the xxD bodies have the AF ability to cope with large aperture lenses. I also purchased a new 70-200 2.8, the first copy went back and the 2nd one still isn't as sharp or fast as my Sigma 100-300 f4 at f2.8 or F4.

I will be buying a 300 2.8 IS in the new year, if that doesn't impress me then i don't know whats going on.
Click to expand...

I've used it on a 1000D and you could tell it was impressive, ditto a 70-200mm f/2.8 L non-IS at Goodwood Festival of Speed.

The Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8:

The Sigma is close to the Canon 70-200 L IS in sharpness at overlapping focal lengths, but is not as sharp at 300mm as the very impressive Canon 300mm f/2.8 L IS.
Click to expand...

From The-Digital-Picture.com.
 
Laudrup said:
The Canon 300 is about as good as it gets for Canon, the 120-300mm is slower to autofocus, less accurate and the QC at Sigma leaves a lot to be desired. It looks a decent lens for the price, but there's a reason it is half the price of the Canikon 300 primes. Plus with a 1.4x TC or 2x TC you can essentially have 3 different lenses.
Click to expand...

Ok. Real simple, have you owned a Sigma 120-300, used over a period of time and studied the results?

Or are you taking somebody elses word for it?

PS........Put a 1.4 or 1.7 TC on a 120-300 zoom and you have a myriad of differing lenses...........;)
 
ive owned 3 of the canon variants and all were excellent, however it isnt a patch on either a Canon or Nikon 300mm prime and its actually only 287mm not 300mm, you cant track while zooming either which most users arent aware of

it mis quick to focus but only about 80% as fast as a 300mm prime, it also suffers with occasional af problems under low light conditions compared to the 300mm prime

yes ive owned them all and yes ive owned both Nikon and Canon variants and yes i do know what im talking about

Its a good lens but has limitations, do you seriously thinik i would spend over £3.5k on a prime if this were as good for £1.2k, erm NO.
 
Gary Coyle said:
ive owned 3 of the canon variants and all were excellent, however it isnt a patch on either a Canon or Nikon 300mm prime and its actually only 287mm not 300mm, you cant track while zooming either which most users arent aware of

it mis quick to focus but only about 80% as fast as a 300mm prime, it also suffers with occasional af problems under low light conditions compared to the 300mm prime

yes ive owned them all and yes ive owned both Nikon and Canon variants and yes i do know what im talking about

Its a good lens but has limitations, do you seriously thinik i would spend over £3.5k on a prime if this were as good for £1.2k, erm NO.
Click to expand...

Pull your knickers out of your bottom, it is all about opinions Gary......;). I prefer the flexibility of zooms over primes, I have my knickers up my bum about that topic...........:LOL:.

The zooms don`t generally match the primes, but I do believe they are catching up and I do think the lens we are discussing is good VFM if you want the flexibility of a zoom.

And yes, some people are that blinded by brand names that they would spend more on lesser goods..........:D

Anyway, nearly beer time.
 
fracster said:
Pull your knickers out of your bottom, it is all about opinions Gary......;). I prefer the flexibility of zooms over primes, I have my knickers up my bum about that topic...........:LOL:.

The zooms don`t generally match the primes, but I do believe they are catching up and I do think the lens we are discussing is good VFM if you want the flexibility of a zoom.

And yes, some people are that blinded by brand names that they would spend more on lesser goods..........:D

Anyway, nearly beer time.
Click to expand...

:LOL::LOL: Like i say its a cracking lens and i seriously wish the major players could produce a decent long f/2.8 zoom of the same quality as their long primes

No doubting the VFM and i have considered switching back to it over the prime, that way i wouldn't need the 70-200 on another body but it just cant guarantee to to work 100% accurately under poor light like the 300 prime can, its about 90% there but i need 99%

Merry Xmas
 
For what its worth I have a Sigma 120-300mm that I bought recently (used it on D200, D2x and D300). I used it for the first time at the IRB Sevens in Dubai in early December and got some great results (had some published by newspapers). Fast AF, very flexible for action coming towards you (you can zoom out!) and decent performance under floodlights even at 300mm. I was shooting with a friend who had the Canon 300m f2.8 - I felt that his shots were a tad sharper but he missed a lot of shots because he was stuck at 300mm. Overall a very impressive and flexible lens. You can see some of my shots here

http://www.ephotozine.com/u107429
 
Adamski said:
Andy, I used to have the 135-400 also but got rid for the 120-300. Absolute beauty of a lens, I've used it for cricket, football, lacrosse and it was very good for tracking aircraft at Fairford.

I've got the Siggy 1.4x teleconverter so you get a 168-420 f/4 lens which is handy for distance.

A worthwhile investment!

Cheers,

Adam.
Click to expand...

I use my 120-300 with the 1.4TC and sometimes even with the 2XTC. The flexibility it gave me when in Kruger NP last summer was great :love:.
 
Really wished I had kept mine now but hey ho :bang:

It weighs a fair bit so a monopod is a must unless you have big arms.

It also works with the Canon 2x extender which is a bonus.

I used for a while at football/rugby events & the pictures were awesome.

If you can find one at a good price then go for it. You will not be dissapointed :)
 
fracster said:
Internet myth. You only ever hear bad tales,never good, and considering how much Sigma lens are in relation to others and how many they sell and have done for a number of years,I think you will find the percentage to be very low.Just my opinion of course.

The 120-300 is a cracking lens........(y)
Click to expand...

Sorry to dig up an old thread, but I've been looking at a the possibility of getting a 120-300 (tbh I'd like the Canon 300 f2.8 IS but cannot afford one). I was talking to a repairer who does a fair bit of stuff on Sigma and he was telling me that some of the early copies had issues with the AF tracking. Apparently some seem to work fine while some struggle to track and can hunt a lot in low light. He was telling me that the issue didn't seem to occur with later copies and that he'd never seen it on a DG version.

Anyway I get to see what the lens is really like soon as I've used agreed to buy a used one from the classifieds... can't wait for it to arrive and to have a play!
 
Hi Guys

I'm also considering this as a new motorsport lens. I'm down at Brands a lot as quite a few on here seem to be.

I was looking at the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS USM series one model, the new one is a bit pricey for me, with a 1.4x converter.

Just wondered how this would compare to the Sigma in terms of quality
 
Sigma gets slated alot on here for their QC. My Sigma has been fine up until recently where the AF is starting to stick at extreme close. Still works fine and i did a few meetings with it like this. But its going to go off to sigma for a service and to be fixed under the 3yr EX warranty.

And it will be repaired by Sigma, not palmed off on some 3rd party.

I also had a dodgy copy of a 70-200 2.8 for what its worth. So Canon are not perfect.
 
Just sold my 120-300 on here - but to be honest am regretting it a little bit. Have the 300 AF-S - but the flexibility of the 120-300 is what makes the lens so special.
 
It depends what you want to use it for, no doubt the sigma 120-300mm f2.8 a cracking lens, like the sigma 100-300mm f4.

As mentioned above, I wish canon would produce something of its ilk.

As a motorsports lens it fantastic, I know Glen highly recommends it, also performs well with the sigma TC's, however it does have it flaws, especially for aviation and low light situations going by 2 friend that have owned this lens, both had issues with its performance for aviation.

I don't doubt for the money the sigma 120-300mm f2.8 can't be beat, however for a little extra, I managed to get a mint condition 300mm f2.8 IS, and I know which lens I would prefer.
 
wow thread from the dead..

another thumbs up from me, its now my lens of choice 99% of the time at equestrian events since going from 1.6 to 1.3 crop. fast, sharp and accurate.

granted its a bit of a beast but thats subjective, personally i hand hold it with no major issue. i bought mind 2nd hand for a shade under the 1000 mark and it looks like its been dragged through a hedge backwards. regarding sigmas repair service as it turns out it seems that while in for a service (zoom ring sticking) sigma discovered signs of droppage which in fact caused the stickage and replaced most of the internal zoom workings all under the cost of their regular service fee.
 
This thread still going :LOL: I am happy to report that I picked up a secondhand example from here quite a long time ago now and I use it all the time :D It is a great lens an I use it mainly for aviation, model and full size, wildlife plus a bit of motor sport.

It is a bit weighty but I can hand hold all day with no major problems. I use it with a Canon 1.4 TC when I need extra focal length and this combo works well.

I am very happy with it and I am now considering the Sigma 28-70 2.8 over the Canon due to the price and how well this lens has worked out :clap:
 
I picked one of these up just the other week. Only used it for an airshow so far but I'm pretty impressed with it, it worked well with the 1.4x TC. It is heavy, although I didn't ave an issue walking round with it all day. A few hours hand held at the rugby is going to be a work out though! I've decided to keep my Sigma 70-200 f2.8 for when I don't need the extra reach as it's a lighter unit :)





(excuse the dust spots!)
 
120-300 with Sigma 1.4 TC on a 1.5 crop body.


Kingfisher5.jpg



Cracking lens and very versatile.
 
WHE have one in their bargain basement. Nikon fit. :naughty:
 
mine arrived today, heavy brute but looking very sharp indeed :)
 
SDK^ said:
The sun was out Friday morning so I took the oportunity to use my 120-300 for the fist time out.

These were both taken with the 1.4x extender fitted. I'm very happy with the sharpness, contrast and colour from the lens :)

50% crop, 420mm, 1/800, F7.1, ISO 400

Simga-120-300_photo1.jpg




420mm, 1/3200, F7.1, ISO 400

Sigma-120-300_photo2.jpg
Click to expand...


excellent pics! what camera and which teleconverter did you use(the make not the magnification)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top