Upload & Sell: Off
| p.1 #5 · Sigma 50-500 OS vs Nikon AF-S 300 f4 + tc14? |
I like it. It's a lot different than the 50-500mm. Yeah, the Bigmos needs lots of light. For wildlife you'd be fine just raising the ISO, but for sure small objects in low light, focus is going to be an issue, not going to be as precise due to the 6.3 aperture. The Bigmos gives you an excellent flower and pseudo-macro lens, too, though. Very versatile.
The 120-300mm is pretty heavy, it's around 6lb if I recall. But the weight is distributed nicely and I have no issues handholding it for long periods of time. The bare lens is incredibly sharp, up there with the 300mm 2.8 primes from Canon and Nikon imho. Where it falls behind the primes is in auto focus speed, which is slower (probably by twice or more) and it has no AF limiter. It also vignettes more. Really, all around, the best way to describe it is: it's like a 70-200 on crack, lol. It has almost no longitudinal chromatic aberration which leads to, in my opinion, an extremely pleasing looking image.
I have the 2x sigma TC which I use with it. It's "okay" at F/5.6 and F/6.3 but not great. F/8 and F/11 sharpen up enough to be very usable. However, the lens loses some of its "pop". AF with the 2x TC is not very good. It's a very affordable way to dabble with 600mm, though--I sure can't afford a real 600mm!
I'm going to pick up the Sigma 1.4x TC on Friday I think. With the 1.4x the lens remains easy to use with good AF and doesn't lose much off its luster/pop. Turns into a 420mm F/4, which is neat. Going to improve a little stopping down to 4.5 and 5.6, but totally usable at f/4 (lots of great 1.4x examples on the photography-on-the.net forums).
Here's a couple samples from the 120-300mm OS with the Sigma 2x TC on it, on D800, all are very heavily cropped, too:
Anyway, I hope this helps. And by all means don't discount the Nikkor 300mm F/4, please. There's some bird and wildlife photographers here that use it and put out MUCH better shots than I do with my Sigma! ;-)