Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Archive 2010 · Sigma 120-300 or Canon 100-400

  
 
Quentin Walls
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Sigma 120-300 or Canon 100-400


Just wondered if CanonShooter got the Sigma 120-300mm and how you like it compared to the 100-400mm.


Sep 11, 2010 at 03:59 PM
davidmarsh
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Sigma 120-300 or Canon 100-400


Take a look at my report on the Sigma 120 -400 zoom, this may help as the two lenses arte similar


Sep 12, 2010 at 05:53 PM
CanonShooter88
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Sigma 120-300 or Canon 100-400


Hey all -

Looks like this post resurfaced. I did get the 120-300mm, but chose to return it and keep the 100-400mm. So far there's nothing like having a 400mm lens in such a small, lightweight package with IS. Also, it drove me nuts how the MFD of the 120-300mm changed as the focal length increased.



Sep 12, 2010 at 08:19 PM
CanonShooter88
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Sigma 120-300 or Canon 100-400


I also felt like the Canon rendered color better.


Sep 12, 2010 at 08:19 PM
Guest

Guest
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Sigma 120-300 or Canon 100-400


I'll wait for Sigma to release the stabilized version of 120-300, then I may be selling my 70-200/2.8 L IS. Yesterday in a theatre, I kinda wished for a longer lens but not a prime as I wanted to zoom flexibly between 200 and 300mm to grab a portrait of a performer. And of course being able to shoot at f/4 or thereabouts with decent sharpness.

If Sigma doesn't want to do it, I may look to their 100-300/4 but keep the 70-200 as the reviews for the 100-300 have been inconsistent.



Sep 13, 2010 at 12:46 AM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Sigma 120-300 or Canon 100-400


CanonShooter88 wrote:
Well I'm going to need some convincing here. I've had the Canon 100-400 for a long time, and it's been a nice flexible lens to carry around. Recently (i.e. past few years) it has seen extremely little use. I shoot sports, and it's my only lens slower than f/2.8. When in daylight and when traveling, I do like the 100-400mm range it offers and the fact that it isn't very heavy.

However, I have an opportunity to snag a used Sigma 120-300mm (non DG), and am considering selling the 100-400mm to put money toward it. I do realize it's a lot
...Show more


well I've never used the 100-400L so I can't compare against that I can say that my 300 2.8 IS PLUS 1.4x TC and my bare 300 f/4 non-IS produced a somewhat better image quality than the bare sigma 120-300. The sigma seemed to be more like 280-285mm and f/2.9-3 to me. The AF wasn't the most precise in the world. It didn't focus as quickly as the 300 2.8 IS.

That said the image quality wasn't bad and the focus speed was pretty good, there are plenty of lenses worse on either or both accounts, it doesn't have poor IQ just not canon tele great and the AF isn't slow just not insanely canon super-tele fast. The AF precision did seem a bit poor though by any standards.

The copy I used was a heavily used pool copy though.

Everyone who used the pool lenses always went for the 300 2.8 IS first, despite losing zoom ability. Everyone agree the 300 2.8 IS produced a lot more keepers.

The 100-400L doesn't, from what I read, have prime-like IQ or AF speed so you probably won't notice any less (other than maybe in AF precision and of course the weight, the 120-300 is way bulkier and the zooming it hand-held was pretty awkward, not that you can't use it hand-held as I often did the 300 2.8 IS for sports, but it does get tiresome and it's a major pain on a vacation and I don't even bother on hikes or all day vacation run-around).



Sep 13, 2010 at 01:51 PM
Ed Peters
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Sigma 120-300 or Canon 100-400


If you're going to shoot sports, I would have to agree: Sigma 120-300 f/2.8.. Then again if you have a good tripod and are a long distance from the action you could go for the Sigma 300-800 f/5.6 (shoot batters from behind the outfield fence)...


Sep 13, 2010 at 04:12 PM
1      
2
       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.