Sigma 120-300 OS - is it an alternative to canon 300??

W

woollyback

Messages
1,417
Edit My Images
No
Folks,

Need a bit of guidance please.

I am saving madly for a 300 f2.8. I can go for the mk1 used now, but all reports i have read give the edge to the mk2 when using a 2Xtc.

I need some reach for wildlife and have tried the 500 f4 but its too heavy to cart around all day, plus handholding is a bit of a stretch for me.

Question is - is the new sigma really an alternative for the canon 300 f2.8 as it could really save me a few quid.:shrug::shrug::shrug:

It would be mated with my 7D and 5D2

Thanks for any views

Cheers

Rob
 
I was luck to get a mint condition 300mm f2.8 MKI a couple of years back and just love it, great lens and easily hand holdable and works well with the MKII TC's, even the 1.4x and 2x TC stacked in the right conditions.

300mm F2.8 (MKI) + 1.4x and 2x TC (MKII) stacked
IMG_6377_copy_1.jpg


Canon 300mm f2.8 + 2x TC (MKII)

IMG_5729copy1.jpg


IMG_5724copy1.jpg


IMG_5711copy1.jpg


Very Overcast and raining
IMG_1887copy1.jpg


IMG_1525copy1.jpg


Personally the 120-300mm a great lens, but the 300mm a daddy of a lens and the MKI IS was the one to beat. Haven't used MKII can't afford one, but MKI 500mm f4 is very tempting
 
Pete,

They are amazing - No 2 has got to hurt.

500 f4 for me is too heavy for my use (handheld) but it gives great image quality and reach. I am not a pro so a few missed shots are OK.

I don't want to buy the 120-300 and regret it vs canon 300.

Thanks for posting the pics :)
 
I bought a 120-300 2.8 and it was pants. Swapped it twice more to see if I could get a good one - no dice. Ended up with a Canon 300 2.8 2nd hand and it was just superb. Sold it after a year to get a 400 2.8 and actually made money on it.
 
Tobers said:
I bought a 120-300 2.8 and it was pants. Swapped it twice more to see if I could get a good one - no dice. Ended up with a Canon 300 2.8 2nd hand and it was just superb. Sold it after a year to get a 400 2.8 and actually made money on it.
Click to expand...

I assume that was the old non OS version you had? The new one is a great lens I find.
Woolyback if your in the South Wales area you are more than welcome to try mine out to see if it suits you. You can look at a POTN thread that is 140 pages long about the 120-300 here:- http://photography-on-the.net/forum/subscription.php
 
Big Andy said:
I assume that was the old non OS version you had? The new one is a great lens I find.
Woolyback if your in the South Wales area you are more than welcome to try mine out to see if it suits you. You can look at a POTN thread that is 140 pages long about the 120-300 here:- http://photography-on-the.net/forum/subscription.php
Click to expand...

Andy,

Thanks for the kind offer but stuck in NE for most of time - any drawbacks to 120-300OS, have you tried it with 2xTC?

Cheers

R
 
Yes I've used it with 1.4x and 2x (not stacked) with the 1.4x it's a great bit of kit. With the 2x it's best to close it down to f6.3 then it will give good results although the bokeh is not as smooth like all lenses with a 2x on.
 
Big Andy said:
Yes I've used it with 1.4x and 2x (not stacked) with the 1.4x it's a great bit of kit. With the 2x it's best to close it down to f6.3 then it will give good results although the bokeh is not as smooth like all lenses with a 2x on.
Click to expand...

Cheers Andy,

What body do use it one, how do you find AF and is it a handled option?

Aplogies for all the questions ?

Cheers

R
 
I use mine on a 50d and have no trouble hand holding, although with the 2x keeping it steady can be a bit tuff but the weight is not the problem just my nerves. Mind you I am 6'4" and seventeen stone so not exactly small myself.
 
Nice oen Andy,

I keep swinging between the 300 2.8 canon which has probably better IQ and focus speed over the flexibility and price of the beastie :)

Thanks for taking the time to post :)
 
I was in the same situation this time last year.
New 120-300mm F2.8 vs used and slightly tatty Canon 300mm F2.8 IS

Couple of deal breakers for me on the Sigma.
1. No focus limiter. This is invaluable for me and sigma have once again overlooked this very basic feature. Mis focus on a bird in the sky and that feels like a long old focus range to scan through.
2. The sigma is only true 300mm at infinity. Close to it's minimum focus distance it is effectively ~240mm and at the ranges I was shooting it would still be well under the 300mm I would like.
 
RichardtheSane said:
I was in the same situation this time last year.
New 120-300mm F2.8 vs used and slightly tatty Canon 300mm F2.8 IS

Couple of deal breakers for me on the Sigma.
1. No focus limiter. This is invaluable for me and sigma have once again overlooked this very basic feature. Mis focus on a bird in the sky and that feels like a long old focus range to scan through.
2. The sigma is only true 300mm at infinity. Close to it's minimum focus distance it is effectively ~240mm and at the ranges I was shooting it would still be well under the 300mm I would like.
Click to expand...

Richard,

Those are two great points to raise - I didn't realise it was that short at close range:'(
The focus speed and accuracy are where the prime probably wins hands down.

However, it will beat the canon from 120-299mm:) so flexibility is its advantage.

Decisions decisions

Thanks for posting up the replies :)
 
I went through the same process not long ago, I really wanted a 300 f2.8. I tried a couple of non-OS 120-300s and a Sigma 300 f2.8 prime but all three were quite soft wide open. So I decided it was between the 120-300 OS and the 300 IS. In the end after trying both lenses and speaking to owners of both I decided to go for the Canon and have not regretted it for a moment. I know a number of very happy 120-300 OS owners but I also know a couple who have ended up switching to the Canon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top