Printable View
Hi, I'm looking to upgrade my 100-400mm lens to a longer and faster option. I've been looking at the 500mm f4 which seem the most popular choice but to be honest, I'd struggle to justify the expense. The new sigma 120-300 f2.8 with OS is supposed to be a nice lens, but does anyone have any experience with this lens. Do you see this as a good upgrade from my current 100-400mm. I could really do with the help and advice.
Thanks
Simon
How about a 300 f/2.8 fixed?
Roger
I bought the 120-300/2.8 OS with Sigma TC 2X APO to replace my 50-500 (Bigma). I have used with a Canon 7D.
It's heavy. Monopod is mandatory. Tripod is best. It depends of what kind of shooting you do. It's heavy.
On the weekend I'll try to post here some pictures of different subjects so you have an idea of what is possible.
My only complaint about it is that the tripod-collar knob is hard on the fingers. The knob on the 50-500 is/was much better.
And it's heavy. Be aware of that. I have a friend (female) who bought a 100-400 3 weeks ago and is selling it because she finds it heavy.
My 0.02.
Thanks for the replies.
Roger I had thought of the sigma 300mm prime, but that doesn't have OS. Not sure if that matters though. My main criteria is quality of image as I'm very fussy, so I would want it to be an upgrade on my canon 100-400.
I think Roger was referring to the Canon 300 2.8L with IS, at a round $4200. I own it and would not sell it for the world. I did own the 100-400 and sold it. The 300 with Canon 2x TC is the best lens I think you could ever own.
Hi Simon,Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Wantling
Grady is correct, I was referring to the Canon 300 f/2.8 L IS. I do not know the sigma ( have nothing against sigma--I have won best in show with a sigma lens). I would check the weight and minimum focus distancce of both lenses, then try and find AF speed and image quality. Choose the better lens if you want a significant quality increase.
I have the canon 300 f/2.8, 500 f/4 and 100-400. I should sell the 100-400 as I very rarely use it. I use the 300 and 500 about 50/50. I find myself using the 300 more and more for its versatility.
I am not sure if this is relevant, but a friend had a tamron 300 f/2.8. It was nice and sharp but had real difficulty focusing with 2x TCs. He sold it and bought a canon 300 f/2.8.
Roger
The Sigma 120-300 f2.8 with OS is a pretty new lens, and review sites don't usually cover third party lenses, so there's not a lot of info about it yet. However Robert O'Toole is up in Alaska with the Nikon version of this lens at the moment, and promised a report when he gets home. If you can hang on for a couple of weeks, he should have some good field info.Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Wantling
I'm also waffling on the 120-300. I can't afford the 500 and I've seen some decent bird images with the Sigma and the 2X on POTN, but I'm waiting to see what Robert comes back with.
Hi, I use the Sigma 300 2.8 which I picked up SH in a local store for 700Euros including a 2x. I would be fussy about IQ so with the 2x I find it acceptable at f9 on 5D MKII. However it has to be the smallest lightest 600mm combo out there. I use it 90% HH or rest it on a wall or fence post if possible. I could walk around with all day. IS is not an issue for me as I shoot mostly birds with it(high SS). It even tracks quite well with the 2x using centre point AF exp points on the 5DII. I was tracking cormorants in flight yesterday and altough I lacked focal lenght the tracking and IQ were quite good. Used bare it is razor sharp from f3.5 and with 1.4x sharp from 5.6. It is very versatile but results with smaller pixel sensor would probably be worse. I find the 5dII very forgiving with extenders.
Bob Atkins review.
http://photo.net/equipment/sigma/120...m-lens/review/
