Sigma 120-300 Owners.

fracster

fracster

I love BRASH and BRASH loves me
Suspended / Banned
Messages
16,666
Name
Ade
Edit My Images
Yes
Can you give me a honest account of the AF speed,IQ and general opinions,good or bad,on this lens please?

Before I pull the trigger.....:)

Joe,thanks for your earlier thoughts.......(y)
 
I'm interetsed to hear, as well -for sports photography.
 
I use for sports photography - mainly football.

My opinion of it is great. Nice and sharp, bokeh is great, AF is fast enough. IMO this is a great lens, and the versatility of the zoom beats the 300 2.8 for me.

This is a great lens and is my favorite at the moment. Better than any lens I have used before.
 
Thanks for that Alex,I assume you bolt it onto the D300?
 
Having owned two 120-300mm sigma's I can confirm that in my opinion it is not a constant 2.8 through the range nor does it focus at anything like the speed of the Nikon 300mm AF-s for example. There are others here who will confirm this.

The Sigma lacks contrast and color rendition compared to the Nikon prime and both examples not only back focused but were very soft at 2.8.
 
of course a prime will focus quicker than a zoom..

if they were back focusing, did you not send them off for calibration? although ive never used one personally i know 4 or 5 people that do and would disagree with your comments. its certainly on my shopping list.
 
neil_g said:
of course a prime will focus quicker than a zoom..

if they were back focusing, did you not send them off for calibration? although Ive never used one personally i know 4 or 5 people that do and would disagree with your comments. its certainly on my shopping list.
Click to expand...

The AF is slow, very slow especially if your are into motor sport or wildlife IE bird flight. The back focusing issues were a pain, I was able to adjust for either the short end or the long end. I did not bother with Sigma as another member who posts here called Tobers, visited sigma having had the same issues. A simple test was performed after calibration and proved that the Sigma simply cannot keep up with modern camera's frame rates. The test was carried out by a Sigma tech, point the lens at a car coming toward you, you would be lucky to get 3 out 10 shot in focus. I will also point out he performed the same test with a siggy 300mm prime with the same results.

As you have not owned this lens it is difficult for you to comment, no offense meant. If you are looking at static shooting it will be fine. However the other issues were and are a major issue for me, very soft at 2.8 in fact you need to open up to 5.6 or above for the lens to work well, rather defeats the point really.

Lacks contrast and suffers color aberration. Certainly not worth the silly money a new one costs, if you can find one for around a £1000.00 then possibly.

It is not up to me how you spend your money, I was and am referring to the OP asking for real life reviews. Good luck whichever way you go.

cheers

Grant

Personally I would suggest the OP go for either a 70-200 2.8 vr or 300 f4 af-s both of which are in a different league to the Sigma
 
gpa said:
An honest opinion
Click to expand...


Thank you very much for that...............(y)

I have owned both lenses that you state,the range of this Sigma appeals to me and fits in with what I have.I think I shall hire one before buying.
 
Well I've had one and have had no problem with focusing on things moving at 400mph+ and that was on a D70s.


378143562_9a588f0713_o.jpg

​

I feel that gpa is talking about a completely different lens. Never heard such negative comments on this lens at all tbh.

I'd agree that I prefer the 300mm f/4 AF-S for 300mm performance. But the 300mm AF-S is unmatched for price / performance. But it'll only do 300mm, so not such a suprise.
 
Thanks Andy and all for your comments.

Anyone in the northwest who has one and would like to meet up somewhere,that would be nice.You can use my 300-800 if I can use your 120-300 for an hour or two?
 
You must have got a bad copy :D:D

Mines fine wide open, and I've had no focus problems with it yet. I did send it back to Sigma to get it rechipped, but that was because it wouldn't work with my D3 in FF mode, kept thinking it was a DX lens.
 
I think you'll love it.

TBH I only had it for about 11 months, and ultimately didn't keep it because as I do a lot of outdoors stuff under my own steam, a 3kg lens is too much of a commitment to carry, but optically its far better than a 70-200 VR with a TC for example.



287872228_fafeaabd26_o.jpg


​
 
Well each to their own I suppose.

Hiring one is a great way to test, good luck whichever way you go.
 
barneyrubble said:
You must have got a bad copy :D:D

Mines fine wide open, and I've had no focus problems with it yet. I did send it back to Sigma to get it rechipped, but that was because it wouldn't work with my D3 in FF mode, kept thinking it was a DX lens.
Click to expand...

LOL I had two:nuts:
 
Mine was the pre-DG version, but had the latest tripod collar. I bought it just as DG was coming in, so picked it up brand new for £920 IIRC.
 
Ok, Honest opinion now - its slower than sigmas shorter lenses at initial focusing, but once it has, it locks on and stays there regardless of movement. When I say slower, this is of course relative, its noticably slower, but I shoot wildlife with it quite easily. IQ is gorgeous and lovely 'bokeh' even wide open. Having said all that, in low light I find it much more responsive than the 24-70, which can hunt a lot. I also use it with a siggie 1.4 TC, which does slow the focus down marginally, but very marginally, however IQ is retained.
 
I love mine and it's sharp enough for me at 2.8 and focuses pretty quickly. I use it with both a 1.4 and 2x TC and it works well with both. This is with a D80, D300 and D700, no problems with any of them, only issue I can see is the weight but that's to be expected for the type of lens it is.
 
Thanks for all the comments and opinions all............(y)

The weight is not an issue,trust me..........:)
 
I've had 2 of these, both were excellent and very sharp at f/2.8 , the last one I had I sold to SBComp who is using it for motorsport and is very happy with it.

I wouldn't hesitate to buy another, not at £1800+ though:LOL: the price is a bit :wacky: these days
 
I am sorry but I dont get the negative comments at all on this great lens! Yeah there will be bad copies out there for sure but show me a single lens that some folk have not had issues with? When I first got mine I had issues with it but rather than sending the lens back to get a refund I sent it to Sigma to get set up and I have to say that now it is set up its a superb lens. I use it on Canon 1ds mkii and Canon 1dmkiii with both yielding excellant results. I have heard of complaints re speed of focus on the 1dmkiii but have had no issues with it myself. Even if I had the money for Canons 300mm f2.8L I would stick with my Sigma and put the money to other uses. This lens is so versatile ie its great for football, motorsport and wildlife. To give you an idea I was shooting athletics with it recently and my mate was using the 300mm prime, he missed loads of shoots that I got due to the fact I could back of slightly taking advantage of the 120-300mm range. Honestly get yourself a hold of one to try out and if the weight is not an issue trust me its a great lens my friend :)
Ricky
 
gpa said:
As you have not owned this lens it is difficult for you to comment, no offense meant. If you are looking at static shooting it will be fine. However the other issues were and are a major issue for me, very soft at 2.8 in fact you need to open up to 5.6 or above for the lens to work well, rather defeats the point really.
Click to expand...

none taken.

however those people i mention all use the 120-300 for motorsport and the pics they have produced show no defect like you suggest so im passing that on for the OP's concideration.
 
The AF is a fraction slower than the Nikon prime. But then the current equivalent Nikon prime is twice the cost. Even the older AF-S II will cost a few hundred more.

I'm perfectly happy with my 120-300 for motorsport. It gets more outings than the Nikon simply for the flexibility the zoom gives.
 
As AndrewC says, I use one for shooting motorsport with. I have no problems with it keeping up with everything up to flat out Formula Renaults, Formula 3 etc and just about any other sort of motorsport you care to mention. I use it on both a 40D and a 1D mk II. I find it to be extremely quick and accurate in focusing and tracking and have no issues whatsoever with colours or contrast from the lens.

For motorsport work, f2.8 really gives too narrow a DoF to be useful, so I can't remember the last time I shot the lens wide open. However, I certainly can say that at f3.5 upwards, my lens is extremely sharp (Grizedale Rally 2007, ISO1600 f3.5 to give a shutter speed for head on shots of 1/200s under exposed by 2/3rd of a stop - it was bloomin' dark LOL).

I don't 'spray and pray' so can't really comment on how it does when shooting like that.

Cheers,

Simon.
 
neil_g said:
none taken.

however those people i mention all use the 120-300 for motor sport and the pics they have produced show no defect like you suggest so I'm passing that on for the OP's consideration.
Click to expand...

Well clearly I'm in the minority her LOL, I have had discussions and comparisons with others that have had the same issues. For me after the second lens exhibited the same issues, it had to go. Both my 70-200vr and 300 F4 are a step up in all ways. However I do have the issue of the loss of flexibility, but as I seem to shoot at 300mm plus most of the time I can live with this as I have a lens to cover the shorter range.

Do I think it's £2000.00 and upward of lens............. nope def not, if you can find one for around 1000-1200 then maybe.

I do not want to get into an argument about it with anyone, clearly there are some happy bunnies here who are using the lens and more than happy with the results.

My perfect lens would either be a 300vr with the option of a 1.4 converter or 500 F4 AF 11

Perhaps I was just unlucky and got two bad DG lens, but I am not going back for more.

TBH I wish I had kept my mouth shut:D

As I said renting one is the perfect way to test this lens out before you press the go button and i wish you all the best.
 
All opinions are welcome and appreciated,no worries..........(y)
 
i have found with mine it is not 100% when used at 2.8 for motorsport, seems to be soft. This was however calibrated to my 1D before it got sent back for that autofocus fix, so think it might be out now. When i take a sequence aswell sometimes it will take the 1st photo OOF, then infocus, then OOF, and in focus for a couple, etc. That is with the shutter speed quite high aswell so definetly not shake.

I will be sending it back down to Sigma for a recalibration as soon as croft this weekend, as there is a few weeks gap in the BTCC Calendar.
 
wack61 said:
I wouldn't hesitate to buy another, not at £1800+ though:LOL: the price is a bit :wacky: these days
Click to expand...
£1800+? If you can get a new one for that price, please tell me where!!!

I heard yesterday that one of our customers had had his car broken into and one of our Sigma 120-300s was amongst the items stolen. So I was looking at the cost of replacing it. It seems really hard to find anything for under about £2300. Bearing in mind that in April last year I bought two of these for £1250-£1300 ... I know prices have gone up this year, but this really does seem a bit extreme. I'm really not sure I want to spend £2300+ replacing it - I'm not convinced it's really worth that much.
 
StewartR said:
£1800+? If you can get a new one for that price, please tell me where!!!

I heard yesterday that one of our customers had had his car broken into and one of our Sigma 120-300s was amongst the items stolen. So I was looking at the cost of replacing it. It seems really hard to find anything for under about £2300. Bearing in mind that in April last year I bought two of these for £1250-£1300 ... I know prices have gone up this year, but this really does seem a bit extreme. I'm really not sure I want to spend £2300+ replacing it - I'm not convinced it's really worth that much.
Click to expand...

Canon mount £1,977.00 from http://www.mifsuds.com/acatalog/ActChange.htm
 
StewartR said:
£1800+? If you can get a new one for that price, please tell me where!!!

I heard yesterday that one of our customers had had his car broken into and one of our Sigma 120-300s was amongst the items stolen. So I was looking at the cost of replacing it. It seems really hard to find anything for under about £2300. Bearing in mind that in April last year I bought two of these for £1250-£1300 ... I know prices have gone up this year, but this really does seem a bit extreme. I'm really not sure I want to spend £2300+ replacing it - I'm not convinced it's really worth that much.
Click to expand...

:eek::eek: OMG!! Like you I paid £1300 less than a year ago, ok an imported one, a UK one was about £1600ish at the time, but thats an obscene amount of money....anyone want to swap for a nearly new D700? :LOL::LOL:
 
I tried this lens and found that it was poor. The focusing mechanism isn't fast enough to keep up with 10 frames per second on a Canon 1DIII. I think that the focusing motor isn't strong enough to move all the glass quickly enough.

I ended up returning mine and buying a Canon 300 2.8 prime second hand for £1500 and am more than satisfied.

Another thing about the Sigma 120-300 - I dont think it is a true 300mm, and I dont think it is a true 2.8. Using the Canon 300 2.8 I could get a faster shutter speed at 2.8 than with the Sigma in the same light. Also, the front diameter of the Sigma looks much smaller than the Canon, so ow can it possibly let in the same amount of light.

As a pal of mine said, there's a reason you dont see many Sigma 120-300s at football/rugby/tennis etc etc.

By contrast, the Sigma 100-300 F4 I had was a cracking lens and worked delightfully with my 1DIII. I'm guessing less glass to move so it could focus quicker and easier.
 
Its a pretty well known fact* that the 120-300 is really only about 270mm.
Same as the Bigma is only really about 440mm.
And the 18-50 f/2.8 is really 19-46mm.
Their 50mm f/1.4 is really about 46mm too.

They do this a lot.



I noticed the Sigma 100-300 f/4 was about 1/3rd of a stop slower than a Nikkor prime, shutter speed was 1/500 vs 1/640 on the same test scene consistantly.

(*Well I assume its well known - I know it anyway!)
 
I recently acquired a 120-300 f2.8. I normally shoot motorsports and tested out this lens at Mallory Park and I admit I was disappointed with the results. On my 50D the camera couldn't track fast moving race cars. The hit rate was low.

I took it to my local Sigma agents (Norfolk Cameras in Dereham) who told me this was a problem for some people but there was a fix for it involving a new focus motor and PCB. One of the shops staff uses one for air shows and his initially had a similar problem and were confident they could fix it.

Mine is having this done now and I hope to get it back this weekend to take to BTCC at Croft.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top