Sigma 120-300mm 2.8

L

Luke_Herts

Messages
513
Name
Luke
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi

I currently have the canon 100-400mm 5.6 IS

Is the sigma much better. Problem i have at the moment is low light performance with the 100-400mm lack of sharpness.

Obviously the Sigma is a lot heavier but i have recently been using my monopod alot so not too much problems and being a sprightly 18 year old weight isn't too much of a problem.

Also how much is quality affected by converters most likely 1.4x?

Cheers
Luke
 
the 120-300 is a supurb lens in my opinion and handles a 1.4x excellently.. it is a little heavy but then i handheld it at goodwood for the majority of the day so thats a little dependant on you.
 
great lens, have rented it a few times :) very good quality, and as previously said, it works great with a 1.4x, however... it is big, heavy, and quite a load to lump around if your moving alot... i gues that depends on your personal preference...
 
the flickr in my sig, the extreme sports -> animal windfest 2009 pics, the boats, kitesurfers and windsurfers are all 120-300 pics if i remember rightly. i think i switched to the 70-200 for the inland stuff
 
I sold my Canon 100-400 IS for a sigma 120-300 F2.8, and never regretted it, it's sharper, a/f quicker.

It works well with a 1.4TC (either canon or sigma), but not as well with a 2.0TC, but that's more down to the TC rather than the lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top