The post man has been! (Sigma 120-300 F2.8)

[Nazbit]

Hi all,

I have hired a Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 for a week and it arrived this morning.

I will be taking it to a couple of motor sport events and just generally trying to get as much use out of it as possible, hopefully with a view to buying it later in the year ... if its up to the job, I will probably also hire the 100-400L before I make my decision.

Every review of this lens comments on its weight, but I still wasn't prepared for how heavy it is, its length isn't really a shock but I think I'll be needing a mono pod and if I buy it....a new gym membership!

Build quality seems nice although I prefer the canon L finish to the sigma EX coating. A lot of people say that the zoom and focus rings are very stiff, but they seem nice and chunky and the resistance is about right. The tripod mount doubles as a nice chunky comfortable carry handle, and has a mounting point for a strap. The strap actually does a very good job of distributing the weight and the angle of the mount means it rests quite conveniently. Although if it was for keeps I think I would replace the sigma strap with something a little more padded.

I suppose thats about all there is to say about it at the moment, I need to get out and test the image quality now!

A quick snapshot from my window...

P.s. - I'm not really sure who or what this post was for! Sorry if it was random and boring!

 

[p0ss3s3d]

Also consider a 300mm f/2.8 prime - would TC much better...

Enjoy the lens (the 100-400L is a different idea- lightweight travel - slow aperture lens. Sigma is designed for situations a 300 2.8 can't cope with distance/framing wise)

 

[lazer46]

Nice pic.

 

[Combat squirrel]

Nice sharp pic there, got a high res link ? im interested in this lens as I do a lot of gig photography, the zoom etc is just right and I could stick on sigmas 1.4x and 2x converters for wildlife.

 

[Nazbit]

Also consider a 300mm f/2.8 prime - would TC much better...

Enjoy the lens (the 100-400L is a different idea- lightweight travel - slow aperture lens. Sigma is designed for situations a 300 2.8 can't cope with distance/framing wise)

I agree that the 100-400 is quite different, its the £600 saving which makes it attractive. I want the lens mostly for motor sport but anything requiring a lot of zoom. I suspect the lower aperture of the 100-400 will rule it out if or when I try it.

As for a 300mm prime, I would love one, but I think they are just too expensive and while the 120-300 wont be as sharp, it may well be more flexible for my needs.

I am very much open to options though and the whole purpose of hiring this lenses and probably others is to ensure I buy the best for my needs.

 

[Nazbit]

Nice sharp pic there, got a high res link ? im interested in this lens as I do a lot of gig photography, the zoom etc is just right and I could stick on sigmas 1.4x and 2x converters for wildlife.

I don't have a high res copy right now as I am on my laptop but I can upload one in the morning. The image was taken with a 1.4x converter (cannon) at 420mm.