Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Sports Lens - How good is it?

P

Phal

Messages
1,297
Name
Etienne
Edit My Images
Yes
I've read various reviews for the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Sports Lens and they all seem favourable. My main question is - How good is it with tele-converters and which ones are best? I haven't seen many shots taken with this lens + converters and I also haven't seen any real comparisons between the sigma and canon converters.

I currently have a canon 100-400mm and would like an upgrade in focal length + sharpness. The price and utility of this lens make it look pretty attractive compared to anything else up to 600mm but I'm wondering whether it's good enough with converters so that I won't get frustrated by it.

On the other hand, if someone is feeling generous and wants to buy me a 200-400 F4L then feel free to PM me and ignore this question ;)
 
I've got the OS non sport version which I believe has the same optics, and agree with the general opinion that it's a great sharp lens with good fast focus. As for convertors that's seems to be variable quality from reading around the forums. In my experience with canon MKII convertors the 1.4x gives good results but the 2x I find soft particularly if wide open to the extent I'm thinking of getting rid of it and going for a 300 2.8 prime. It maybe the case that with MKIII or Sigma extenders it would perform better.
 
I've used my non Sport version with both Sigma and Canon III 2X's and there was very little difference in IQ that I could see. Certainly works for me. Though you will find it an awful lot heavier than your 100-400
 
Hi Phal

I am sure that there are others here better qualified than me to respond, but, in the past few years I have owned Canon 300f2.8ISL, 500f4ISL, 600f4ISL and Nikon 500f4ISL lenses for wildlife shooting as well as Sigma 300f2.8, and 120-300f2.8 non-OS and OS and now have the 120-300OS Sport. I have the new Sport purely as a lightweight wildlife lens due to having a dodgy knee and was struggling with the weight of the 500/600 primes. Anyway, I have only used the 120-300 OS Sport once, last weekend, and was highly delighted with how it performed as a 600f5.6 or better still stopped down to a f6.3 using the Sigma x2 EX DG teleconverter. The sedge warbler shot below is a heavy crop and I have not optimised the PP on this image. Bottom line is it is a stunning lens and even though I read a lot about it having the same optical formula as the non-Sport version it is a better lens in EVERY respect including sharpness. With the x2TC onboard it does not AF as fast as the primes without but it is still plenty fast enough for most purposes. Definitely worth the money IMVHO.

Gary

SedgeW_zps9ef000b2.jpg
 
Definitely looks good! Might need to rent one with a TC to give it a whirl
 
I've got the one prior to the current model, pin sharp, as sharp as any of my nikon glass including the 500mm F4. Superb with the 1.4 sigma tc on, no difference to the nikkor 1.4 tc in quality, my copy of the sigma 2x tc is ok but not brilliant, needs stopping down to F8 and then its a last resort, I would imagine the canon 2 x tc might be a better option.
 
Yeah I've checked to see how much it is to hire and I'm very tempted to give it a go! Would be nice if there was a site that had tested the two different sets of TCs but I've yet to find anything.
 
I've been using the "sport version" that you are asking about for a while now, check my latest ones on Flickr, i got the tuning puck and did some minor adjustments that made a noticeable difference.
 
I've already got the USB dock for my 18-35mm camera so I guess that's a start :D
 
Neil B said:
I've been using the "sport version" that you are asking about for a while now, check my latest ones on Flickr, i got the tuning puck and did some minor adjustments that made a noticeable difference.
Click to expand...
I had a check on your Flickr and there's some good stuff there ;) Shame you strip the EXIF :P

Are some of those without a TC or are they all with one? They mostly seem to be birds and it's hard getting close to those unless you're a ninja.
 
Phal said:
Yeah I've checked to see how much it is to hire and I'm very tempted to give it a go! Would be nice if there was a site that had tested the two different sets of TCs but I've yet to find anything.
Click to expand...

I've tested Sigma telecons against Canons and Nikons and Kenko Pros. There is very little between them in terms of IQ, which is not that surprising considering all they do is magnify what's already there. 90% of the IQ is determined by the mother lens, and hence 1.4x is sharper than 1.7x is sharper than 2x.
 
HoppyUK said:
I've tested Sigma telecons against Canons and Nikons and Kenko Pros. There is very little between them in terms of IQ, which is not that surprising considering all they do is magnify what's already there. 90% of the IQ is determined by the mother lens, and hence 1.4x is sharper than 1.7x is sharper than 2x.
Click to expand...
Thought there might be a small amount of optimisation between Sigma lenses and their TCs and Canon lenses and their TCs? Whether it be optical or just AF related?
 
Phal said:
Thought there might be a small amount of optimisation between Sigma lenses and their TCs and Canon lenses and their TCs? Whether it be optical or just AF related?
Click to expand...

I don't believe there is. In optical terms, there is more difference between different focal lengths of lens than there is between brands, and the way the incoming light cone is presented to the telecon. The only notable difference I could see between different brands of telecon was edge sharpness, though that was marginal.

I'm not saying all telecons are all the same quality, though there is honestly very little in it between brands. What makes the difference is a) the quality of the mother lens, and b) the telecon magnification.
 
I guess the question is, given the choice, would people recommend the Canon mk3 extenders with this Sigma lens or would they recommend the Sigma converters?
 
Phal said:
I guess the question is, given the choice, would people recommend the Canon mk3 extenders with this Sigma lens or would they recommend the Sigma converters?
Click to expand...

TBH, in this case I think I'd probably go with Sigma. Not for the optical side, but more to avoid any potential electronic/AF etc mismatch. Not that I think there would be any, but they're not unknown and everything should also work correctly with the Sigma USB Dock etc, now and with future cameras (I'd recommend the USB Dock for this lens). Thing is, if you were to be unlucky and have problems, neither Sigma nor Canon would be able to sort them out.

And on the same kinda theme, if you're ever disappointed with the sharpness of this combo, it's more likely to be down to inaccurate AF than optical performance.
 
Yeah I've got the dock already so that wouldn't be a problem but other than my 18-35mm, all my other lenses are canon. Not sure if I'd want the extender on with any other lenses but I guess the Canon one might work better with those lol

Ah well! Guess I'll wait till I've got a bit more cash before I worry about that :D
 
I have both Sigma and Canon III 2X's purely on value basis get the Sigma, the very marginal diff, even if there is one isn't worth the extra cash of getting the Canon one.
 
I had a look at one in a shop today and mmm :D Even if it was a dirty Nikon mount one ( I washed my hands after so I should be safe), it still looked nice! Definitely quite a hefty lens.

Anyway, now I just need some money!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top