Sigma DG vs non DG?

andyjayh

andyjayh

Messages
487
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
Yes
Looking around for a deal on a Sigma 120-300 2.8 and I came across a shop that has a second hand one for about £1200 including the Sigma UV filter, about £140 worth.

They say the lens is in great condition with only a few marks but optically superb. However it is the non DG version so I assume it is over a year old. On the plus side it will come with 3 month warranty from the shop so you have some protection.

Firstly, does £1200 seem a bit steep when they are selling new for £1600?

Secondly, is there much difference between the DG and non DG versions?

I have also found a private one which is a year old, perfect condition, DG - about £1200 again.

:thinking::thinking:
 
The only difference is the 'coating' on the lens element(s) supposedly the DG coating lets in more of the right kind of light or some such bull :)
 
Well, the DG, as Steep says, has only the coating different, which as I studied a lot about it, does absolutely nothing! It's simply marketing. They said that it would eliminate flare from the light bouncing off the digital sensor. Haven't noticed any flare myself, neither all the non-DG users out ther. The thing that you should get the new DG version though for, is the new tripod collar. It's bigger and more balanced.
I think that £1200 for the non-DG is a bit steep. You can get a DG SH for that price, even with a UV.

I have the non-DG myself, got it UK SH, excellent condition with a £150 Heliopan UV for £1050 incl. delivery. The tripod collar is a bit unbalanced, so I bought a manfrotto lens plate which is 14cm long, which helps you find the exact center of gravity of your lens depending on your setup (which camera, TCs etc)
 
Thanks one and all for the advice. Yes I think this is a bit steep for a lens of this age.

Thanks stylgeo, good point, I forgot about the tripod collar being smaller on the non DG version. I saw quite a few comments on fredmiranda regarding the smaller tripod plate.

As OSD do them brand new for pretty much the same money, I think I will be better going that route.

Thanks for helping my thought process! (y)
 
My review of the Sigma 120-300 is here : http://www.ph-digitalphotography.com/gallery_pages/sigma-120-300_review.html

The non DG Tripod Collar is really too small. The DG coatings don't make any difference.

Left- DG Right- Non DG

Sigma_120-300_03.jpg
 
I bought a new one (DG of course) in Dubai last week. It cost me £1,000, plus £250-odd import duty and VAT at Heathrow. (It's for the lens hire business, so I have to be squeaky clean about things like that.) £1,200 for a second-hand one does seem a bit steep.
 
Certainly does. Every time a see a second-hand one the prices are not that good when compared to OSD (£1225), saving a couple of hundred to get a lens that is a year or so old isn't a great deal. I saw another SH one for £950 and even though this is great against UK prices (£1600) it's not fantastic against HK :shrug:
 
If you get a good deal on the non-DG, the lens collar (TS-41) can be ordered direct from Sigma for about £100. I did that for my 300 prime...
 
grumpybadger said:
If you get a good deal on the non-DG, the lens collar (TS-41) can be ordered direct from Sigma for about £100. I did that for my 300 prime...
Click to expand...

I've just bought a S/H non DG, is the original collar really that poor Paul?
 
I have the none dg.. the collar is the same as on the 70-200. its only poor because its only use is tripod/monopod.. yet the dg collar is also a handle for carrying the lens. I now have the TS-41 collar on the none DG

I would say 800-900 for a used one.. you can buy new from hong kong for 1k cancha?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top