Anything worth upgrading the sigma 120-300mm to?

413x

413x

413x

Caporegime
Joined
13 Jan 2010
Posts
33,197
Location
Llaneirwg
Have this lens but I rarely take it out as it is basically so damn heavy
I did take it with my monopod around zoo for 7 hours only sitting down for lunch and tbh I was done by the end

I find it doesn't take a tc to well to the point I prefer cropped in 300mm to 300x1.4 mm
Maybe it's the slowing of the auto focus?

Turns out that I'm not getting round to doing much sport either but the zoom was useful at zoo I'll grant it that

DP did say when I was looking at it that there is nothing better in that price bracket

The canon 200-400mm is really too much
The 300mm f2.8 might not be worth the extra outlay
Anything 5.6 is too slow. I'm often below that with the sigma
Really 2.8 is desirable. Not even sure f4 is enough?

If there is nothing there's nothing but just looking at later this year options that are lighter with faster AF and better stabilisation
 
300mm f/4.0 IS, it is smaller and lighter. You give up the zoom and a stop, takes a TC very well But you will be down to F/5.6.

Otherwise the new canon 100-400mm but you will be at f/5.6 for most of the longer range.

If you need more reach, mainly for birds there is the Tamron 150-600mm f/6.3. Slower again.


If you find you need less reach then the canon 70-20mm f/2.8 is except and half the weight.

You have to choose what you compromise. There is no real upgrade that will be lighter. Everything lighter is a downgrade, either reach or aperture or both.
 
Yeah I really don't want an f5.6 is just not enough in dingy England to freeze anything

If I had to have something better (keeping everything else the same) it would be faster AF and picture quality at 300mm with actual usability with a tc
The lens is fine too hand hold. It's just not too fun carrying it around for hours

Is canons 300mm f2.8 ii is an option? It's about 600g lighter too

Looking at a weight chart of the canon teles I can see why the 400mm DO exists!
 
Last edited:
Surprised you're struggling with a TC on the lens, loss of love for the performance over on POTN using TC's. I had the old 120-300 and that was okay with TC's.
 
Rojin said:
Surprised you're struggling with a TC on the lens, loss of love for the performance over on POTN using TC's. I had the old 120-300 and that was okay with TC's.
Click to expand...

I'll see what it is like with 70d I now have
It made my 35mm f1.4 sigma usable!

I think I'm suffering in general with AF speed
And also 1.4tc is always going to be used with lens near widest aperture at near 300mm
 
I didn't get on with my 120-300 F2.8 Sport in combination with 1.4TCs. The quality of the lens alone was good but with TCs I really wasn't impressed.

300mm F2.8L mk2 would be something to consider

I don't think you should discount F5.6 though. My 200-400 is F5.6 with the TC engaged (320-560) and I've just gotten used to having to use some higher ISOs.

There really aren't many options at this range and the prices aren't great :P The new 100-400mm could be worth a look if you can deal with bumping your ISOs up

The new 400mm DO mk2 is interesting but not something I can really buy since I'm still paying for my 200-400 lol
 
Last edited:
The 200-400mm is a little too much to swallow I feel. It probably would be what I would pick
The 400mm DO also. Especially the low weight
It's kind of good they aren't much cheaper as I think they are definitely too much for a hobby

I've never liked high iso. I hate the noise it introduces. Don't think I have any keeper pics I've used that are above 320. Makes you appreciate why the 'how good at high iso comes up'

If the 7d2 was much better at high iso it would make f5.6 lens + 7d2 cheaper than 70d + f4
But 5.6 is definitely something I think would irritate me

I'm beginning to think the 300mm mk2 is the only option. And to be an option it would have to be very good and fast AF. It would also need to be usable with 2x tc
After all the sigma is much cheaper and has f2.8 300mm
 
Rojin said:
Surprised you're struggling with a TC on the lens, loss of love for the performance over on POTN using TC's. I had the old 120-300 and that was okay with TC's.
Click to expand...

On my OS version it takes a 1.4 brilliantly, there is little descernable difference in colour, sharpness or AF. I think in the centre it still out resolves the D7000. With the 2x it takes a big hit though.

Al4x have you got a Blackrapid or other proper over shoulder strap? It makes a massive difference. I've climbed "mountains" with the BR strap and the 120-300 by my side. It works fine in Zoos when I'm there as well.

It's a big, heavy, lens but at the moment everything else is entire a compromise or weighs the same/heavier. The only similar lens that would come close is the 100-300 f/4 that Signa used to make, unfortunately they stopped doing it and haven't produced a replacement as a new version (with OS) would make a great compromise. 300 f/4 and 420 f/5.6 but with the zoom option, and little heavier than the Nikon 300 f/4.
 
After my trial with the 120-300mm Sport + TC I realised one thing... If you want a 600mm lens then don't buy a 300mm lens + TC

I always hated going above like 400ISO before I got my 7d2 and always tried to avoid it but I think that was my mistake. With the 7d2 I decided to give the camera more of a test and just used whatever I needed to get the exposure required. The 7d2 is the best Canon crop when it comes to high ISO but as most people know, the difference isn't that great.

Recently I've tried to focus on getting good with handheld shots using my 200-400. I'm quite a big guy but not exactly the strongest person in the world. I've found that with the right technique and more importantly, with a strap, you can do pretty well.

I have the strap on the lens and when it's over my shoulder like a courier bag, it makes it a lot easier to get a steady shot because it keeps everything in place with minimal effort from my arm. I found these two vids which explain some tips that definitely help keep things steady.

There really aren't many lenses to consider when you want long/fast apertures and none of these are light (or cheap) lol. The cheaper ones which are generally the old ones also tend to be heaviest.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h11HE5Viuuw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDsx3-FWfwk
 
I have a non standard strap but I don't think it's that good really.
It's a single strap and it often slides round (so pad is no longer on my shoulder)

I have a long weekend this weekend and will see if AF has improved moving from 60D to 70D.
I don't find the lens weight itself too heavy to support but long days with it are off putting in heat. But looks like as said all fast lenses are in this weight range

I definitely noticed degradation with 1.4 at 300. Think that's a definite. To have a better result with a canon 300mm f2.8 is mkii would be worth it. But I would also want the 2x to be OK too due to cost
 
Rojin said:
Surprised you're struggling with a TC on the lens, loss of love for the performance over on POTN using TC's. I had the old 120-300 and that was okay with TC's.
Click to expand...

The only reason I do t own the sigma 120-300 is because there is a dramatic drop off in performance with TCs. The 1.4x is OK but noticibky worse and the 1.7x and 2.0x don't give critical sharpness, unlike the canon and Nikon 300mm primes that happily take 2.0xTCs.

Naked the lens is at least as sharp as the canon and Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8s though.
 
If you are considering a big investment you could check out what the Nikon side, the Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 is £4000 cheaper than the canon but no buit in TC. Nikon have also released an I sanely small 300mm f/4.0 PF that is half the size and weight of the canon version and original Nikon. Of course if you need more reach the Canon 400mm DO is a better option.
 
al4x said:
I have a non standard strap but I don't think it's that good really.
It's a single strap and it often slides round (so pad is no longer on my shoulder)

I have a long weekend this weekend and will see if AF has improved moving from 60D to 70D.
I don't find the lens weight itself too heavy to support but long days with it are off putting in heat. But looks like as said all fast lenses are in this weight range

I definitely noticed degradation with 1.4 at 300. Think that's a definite. To have a better result with a canon 300mm f2.8 is mkii would be worth it. But I would also want the 2x to be OK too due to cost
Click to expand...

I don't have a special strap for my 200-400 either, just the standard one which came with the lens which his quite nice.

There are new Sigma TCs especially designed to work with the Sport lenses but I think that's more about working with firmware/settings dock rather than improving quality

The 200-400mm is the perfect lens for me and it's nice to know there's nothing better out there to fill that role... That being said, I'd love to have one of those new 400mm F4 DO mk2 lenses for when I know I won't need to zoom since they sound so awesome :D
 
D.P. said:
If you are considering a big investment you could check out what the Nikon side, the Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 is £4000 cheaper than the canon but no buit in TC. Nikon have also released an I sanely small 300mm f/4.0 PF that is half the size and weight of the canon version and original Nikon. Of course if you need more reach the Canon 400mm DO is a better option.
Click to expand...

If the DxoMark scores are anything to go by, the Canon is a decent bit sharper but I guess that should be expected given how much newer it is and the price difference. The Canon is almost as sharp with the TC engaged when compared to the Nikon :D
 
D.P. said:
If you are considering a big investment you could check out what the Nikon side, the Nikon 200-400mm f/4.0 is £4000 cheaper than the canon but no buit in TC. Nikon have also released an I sanely small 300mm f/4.0 PF that is half the size and weight of the canon version and original Nikon. Of course if you need more reach the Canon 400mm DO is a better option.
Click to expand...

Ugh I thought you might say that.
It would be something for next year (a switch) but I have thought about it

Nikon lenses seem much more amateur friendly in terms of bang for buck
And looking at that lens it does seem ideal price

I've been informed the nikon macro 200mm is fairly good too
 
al4x said:
The 200-400mm is a little too much to swallow I feel. It probably would be what I would pick
Click to expand...
The Canon 200-400 is 700g heavier than your Sigma : 3.6kg vs 2.9kg. So if you're complaining about weight then it's not the one to go for.

The Canon 400mm F4 DO IS MKII is the one you need - it only weighs 1.9kg !! :)
 
Unfortunately the DO II is completely out of price range.
It's probably at the never going to get price range

I'd say the canon 300mm f2.8 ii is the only canon I could consider
The 200-400mm nikon is also in price range

And at the prices these teles are swapping system isn't out of the question. It would be a damn hassle tho and absolutely not this year
 
It's a man's lens! :D

It's only a few thousand more *cough* Just sell something like a kidney or relative
 
The weight I can take off worth it - especially with a system I could carry it on hot days on my back

The cost is another matter.. Have to keep reminding myself is a hobby
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom