which 300mm lens....

mark richards

mark richards

Messages
5,429
Name
mark
Edit My Images
Yes
I know we have been here before,and I have been on many forums looking at these lenses ...but theres nothing better than hands on experience.....
these are the lenses, that I can't make my mind up with, HELP!!!
sigma 100-300 2.8 said to be sharper than the 300 2.8 sigma, and auto focuses with all sigma converters... nikon 300 f4 ,with 1.7 converter,a sharp lens even with the 1.7 on, or the older 300 2.8 ed nikon, the one that was out before the vr...cannot justify the cost of the VR version ...
swaying towards the 100-300 sigma, handy focal lengths for butterflies ....mark
 
I think you mean the 120-300 f2.8 Sigma

In my own personal experience the 300mm f2.8 Sigma prime was sharper all round but both are quality lumps, for butterflies you may appreciate the zoom
 
The Sigma 120-300 is supposed to be a bit sharper in the centre (very little) BUT much less sharper everywhere else than the 300mm. MTF charts below.

Also the AF on the prime is faster.

If you need the zoom though it is the way to go, I almost changed my Sigma 300mm for the 120-300mm but then I decided that what I really wanted was the Canon 300mm 2.8 IS

Comparison review:
http://archive.popphoto.com/cameral...ht-for-you-the-70-200mm-f28-debate-page1.html

120-300mm
120-300.jpg


300mm
300.jpg
 
I have the 300 f4 with 1.4 and 1.7 TC. if you don't need 2.8 it will do you fine.
 
mark richards said:
thanks for the charts, micloi...but the reviews that I found stated otherwise, with people that owned both lenses , of course not at the same time...the only thing that puts me off with sigma is they'r QC...thanks mark..
Click to expand...

300mm f4 AF-S :thumbs:

I owned a top end Sigma once, not a mistake I would repeat, sample variation should not happen at those price points :nono:

If you have to go for a zoom 200-400 f4, great Butterfly lens :D



 
Martyn... said:
300mm f4 AF-S :thumbs:

I owned a top end Sigma once, not a mistake I would repeat, sample variation should not happen at those price points :nono:

If you have to go for a zoom 200-400 f4, great Butterfly lens :D



Click to expand...


My experience also ( 2 x 120-300mm 2.8 & a 300mm 2.8) and I made the same move:D

th3 300 AF-S F4 is razor sharp and takes a converter well.
 
Yet more questions about Nikon's 300mm F4, what's it like with TCs and anyone had problems with the AF motors?

Thanks for the help.
 
FiestaRed said:
Yet more questions about Nikon's 300mm F4, what's it like with TCs and anyone had problems with the AF motors?

Thanks for the help.
Click to expand...

I have the 300 F4. Used with both 1.4 and 1.7. Wouldn't use a 2x.

AF works with both the but prefers good contrast with the 1.7.

no problem here with the motor.
 
I haven't used mine with converters yet. (sigma 120-300 f2.8 canon fit)

I find it very useable wide open and at f4 its brilliant. The only problem that I experience is @ 300mm trying to keep the lens still when hand holding. It forces me to use higher shutter speeds so I'm going to buy a monopod.

I think it could have done with IS for hand holding and probably something to bear in mind when comparing with other lenses. Its a serious piece of kit and well worth consideration. Personally I'd buy it again.
 
Thanks for the help guys, waiting for stock coming back into W/E. No TCs at the minute.
 
the 120-300 handles a 1.4x like it isnt there (apart from the drop from F2.8 to F4 obviously), i was pleasantly surprised..

(mines the older non-DG one for reference but i dont think it matters)
 
I have the sigma 120-300mm F2.8, and it's a very sharp lens, great with the sigma 1.4 tc, not so good with the 2.0 TC.

Biggest problem is it's weight, it's a beast to cart around.
 
Les McLean said:
I have the sigma 120-300mm F2.8, and it's a very sharp lens, great with the sigma 1.4 tc, not so good with the 2.0 TC.

Biggest problem is it's weight, it's a beast to cart around.
Click to expand...

it is a bit of a weighty lens, it is comparible with the 300 2.8L but the F4 is a whole kilo lighter.

obviously its subjective to how much weight you can lift, i have handheld the 120-300 at sports events before (recreational shooting). however this weekend i had a particularly long day out in the cold wind (working) from 9am to 6pm, i forgot my monopod and it has destroyed me on alsorts of levels lol.

although if youre thinking of using it for butterflys etc you wont have it up and down to your eye like a yoyo like i did yesterday.
 
I had the Sigma 300 F2.8, sold it to get the 120-300.

I also have the 1.4* and 2* TC for it.

My opinion is that the 1.4* I would use at a moments notice. The 2* would have to be in very good light, and it also slows the AF down by a considerable margin.

These three were taken with the 2* TC in place, just snaps for the kids of their bunnies, so no crit please :lol::lol::lol:

The sharpness is not bad at all in full size, they printed out pretty well.

nibbles1.jpg


nibbles2.jpg


thunder1.jpg
 
HoppyUK said:
Have you seen this review? Says it's a beast and AF is slow.
Click to expand...

quote that review:

Autofocus can't keep up with action rapidly moving toward or away from the camera.
Click to expand...

personally i found it was fine at the sunseeker rallye last month attached to a 20D. im not sure why theyre saying it cant cope with runners..

also yet to see any front/back focus issues.

but like i say, ive got 3 good focusing sigmas i think im just lucky :D
 
The AFS 300 f4 is a really neat bit of kit - most important is that its light. I can shoot handheld... obviously providing the shutter speed is reasonably high(!!). Things like any of the 300mm f2.8's and handheld for any length of time (ie a whole weekend at a race circuit) is not something you'd want to do.

Slower shutter speeds and when adding TC's though I stick it on a monopod.
 
HoppyUK said:
To justify the 120-300, I think you really have to need both f/2.8 and the zoom. If you don't, there are better and cheaper options.

Have you seen this review? Says it's a beast and AF is slow. Some other issues mentioned. But if you want what it's got, pretty good http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-120-300mm-F-2.8-EX-DG-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx

Puzzled by your butterflies comment :thinking:
Click to expand...

That pretty much mirrors my experience with both the 120-300 and the 300mm 2.8.

I posted this some time ago and got shot down in flames:D

"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 "

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=140085

I also failed to note it is NOT 2.8 across the zoom nor is it a full 300mm reach more like 270mm, nor did I metion the new siggy zoom delivered all boxed up and sealed with a little present left for me........................................ A dead earwig in side:D

For a Grand go for it but list price.......... you could do a lot better.
 
neil_g said:
i remember that was also directed at me at the time.. i do own one now and i still think youre wrong ;)

(personal opinion and all that)
Click to expand...

Hi Neil no offense meant at all just my personal experience of Sigma, clearly there are happy owners out there so perhaps I just got unlucky. Sadly it has soured my feeling toward Sigma forever. On a plus note the 70-200 and the 100-300mm were stellar:thumbs:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top