Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sigma 120-300 F2.8 Sport

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Sigma 120-300 F2.8 Sport

    I'm still dithering here, but the more I look at this lens(on the 'tinternet, haven't found a shop with one in shop yet), the more I am interested, seems to be more versatile, better weather proofing and half the price of the Canon and also has optical stabilisation. Has anyone tried it or knows someone who has?
    Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way

    #2
    Re: Sigma 120-300 F2.8 Sport

    I don't own one, but friends have owned this lens and nothing but praise for it.

    However, for wildlife they always used it at 300mm and often with a 1.4x; almost never at the shorter magnifications. Consequently, they all changed to the Canon 300mm f2.8 (except for the Nikon user, but we don't talk to him much!)

    So how do you intend to use this lens? If it is regularly throughout the range then go for it. If it is mostly at the long end, then check out the Canon 300mm f2.8 prime. The MKI versions are going on auction sites for similar prices to the Sigma and in my opinion, the 300mm f2.8 is probably the finest lens Canon ever produced. Optically superb and so fast to focus it could track an Exocet missile.
    Colin

    Comment


      #3
      Re: Sigma 120-300 F2.8 Sport

      I have the version before the sport and find it a good lens. Fast to focus but HEAVY so best used on a mono or tripod. You can carry it about all day but you know it.
      it seems well built . Like Colin says if you are using it just at the 300 end then possibly a Canon 300 would be a better choice.
      i certainly am happy with mine.


      https://flic.kr/p/nV8WUg
      Ray

      Comment


        #4
        Re: Sigma 120-300 F2.8 Sport

        Like most things in life it's a possible compromise, now I'm retired I have to justify it to myself as to whether it really is what I want. I would probably use it as much with 1.4 and 2 times convertors as without, but there are a couple of hides where I would need to be able to go to 300mm and back out again without taking the lens off. The waterproofing is apparently very good on these sports lenses, which is a bonus when you live up here and I rather thought I'd buy something that has not done a lot of work. Most of the second hand Canon 300 mk's 1 seem to have been used by sports pro's and look tired.
        Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way

        Comment


          #5
          Re: Sigma 120-300 F2.8 Sport

          Most of the second hand Canon 300 mk's 1 seem to have been used by sports pro's and look tired.
          Agreed, but if you are prepared to wait for the right one, an amateur use well cared for example will come along.
          Colin

          Comment


            #6
            Re: Sigma 120-300 F2.8 Sport

            I bought the original version a few years ago. It gives good quality images, but is very heavy, heavier than the specified 4 kg on the website of the company I bought it from. I no longer carry it when going out for the day on the off chance I'll want to use it, but do take it on trips to wildlife reserves, sporting events etc., and always with a monopod. I'm thinking of replacing it with a Canon 300 mm f/2.8, as I mostly use it at the long end of the range.

            I'm a stickler for using protective filters on my expensive lenses, and finding one to fit this lens was difficult, involved a long wait for restocking (I bet they don't sell many), and cost over £100.

            Sigma also make a 300 mm f/2.8 prime telephoto lens. I doubt it's quite as good as Canon's, but it's half the price.

            Comment


              #7
              Re: Sigma 120-300 F2.8 Sport

              Watching three different mark one Canons at the moment and if I stop dithering I might even bid for one !!
              Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way

              Comment

              Working...
              X