about | support
home
 

Search Used

Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 EX DG HSM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
93 328275 Nov 1, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
82% of reviewers $2,114.63
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.31
9.50
9.1
120_300_1_

Specifications:
This telephoto zoom lens has a large aperture of F2.8 that is constant throughout the zoom range. The angle of view of the 120-300mmF2.8 varies from 20.4degree to 8.2degree and offers great versatility of composition from a fixed position. Two Special Low Dispersion (SLD) glass elements in the front lens group and two in the rear group offer effective compensation of color aberration. Since focusing and zooming do not change its overall length, this lens offers ease of handling. HSM ensures a quiet, high-speed, AF as well as full-time manual focus (for Sigma, Canon and Nikon mounts). A removable tripod collar is provided with the lens. As the front of the lens does not rotate, circular polarizing filters can easily be used. When this lens is used with the 1.4x EX or 2x EX Apo Tele Converters (optional), it becomes a 168-420mmF4 AF telephoto lens or a 240-600mm F5.6 AF ultra-telephoto lens respectively. The lens materials used in this new lens are lead and arsenic free ecological glass.


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6  next
      
Drew_Persson
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 25, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1214
Review Date: Jan 16, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,200.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: GREAT color and contrast (like it more than my L lenses), built like a tank, works well with Sigma 1.4x TC.
Cons:
Heavy, mounted on a 1D you're well over ten pounds of camera.

Can't beat it for the money, heck might not be able to beat it for twice the money. It's heavy and my arm cringes when I pull it out of the bag, but WOW the 120-300 captures some gorgeous images. Not much else to say...highly recommended.

Makes me want a Sigmonster.


Jan 16, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Drew_Persson to your Buddy List  
willis
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 23, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 478
Review Date: Jul 27, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Range, versatility, fast and sharp wide open, rapid AF, gorgeous bokeh, well built, good value, excellent with sigma 1.4X and & 2x TCs.
Cons:
Heavy (hand holdable but not much fun for prolonged periods), no IS, no focus range limiter. Very expensive front filter (105mm).

I bought this with a little trepidation as all my other lenses are Canon. Its now my sharpest lens. Excellent for sports as I hoped but what I didn't expect is the quality with a 2x TC. It needs a tripod but it's a great wildlife lens. From reading other reviews I seem to have a very good copy. I have nothing but praise for it.
While its fairly expensive its cheap compared to canon alternatives (and Canon don't make anything truly comparable).


Jul 27, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add willis to your Buddy List  
tech058
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 24, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 28
Review Date: Jul 15, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,300.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Outstanding Color, contrast, sharpness. Only 300mm zoom with fixed f/2.8 aperture. Surprisingly sharp.
Cons:
For 1-series bodies, this lens must be sent back to Sigma and calibrated or you may find yourself with misfocus issues.

Over all this is a great lens for the price (FOR THE PRICE). Performance is Canon L series quality, however the lens required that I send it back to Sigma with my body costing me $250 in shipping/insurance.

If I spend that kind of money on a lens it should work perfectly right out of the box.

PROS:
Lens is tack sharp 120-200 @ f/2.8.
Lens is less sharp but still very good 250-300mm @ f/2.8.
Sigma 2X and 1.4X TC works very very well.
DOF is about 1 inch at 300mm f/2.8 when focused @ 12' or ~4m.
Bokeh is very good (due to short DOF and 9 aperture blades).
Build quality is outstanding.
Color reproduction is outstanding (very pleasing with skin tones).
Contrast is outstanding.
AF Speed is quick (Not 300mm f/2.8L IS quick but still good), if you are completely out of focus the lens may take a 1/2 second to find your target, but with a little good practice of keeping the lens manually close focused to what you're looking for goes a long way. If the lens is near correct focus, this lens will snap into place very very quickly.
Front element is hypnotically large and impressive for the size of this lens.
Weight - most people think 6lbs is too heavy, however if you try the Canon 400mm f/2.8L lens you're talking 15lbs! I find 6lbs is very hand-holdable for short periods (but a tripod helps).

CONS:
This lens doesn't work well on a 1-series body straight out of the box, requires calibration.
Once calibrated I still only have a 85% AF success rate. Occasionally this lens will seek the background instead of my target, but if you're careful or AF on high-contrast points you'll be fine.
Canon 2X TC does not work well with this lens.



Jul 15, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add tech058 to your Buddy List  
sdgphoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Apr 14, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 145
Review Date: Apr 4, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: No other lens that zooms to 300mm with steady f2.8, very sharp wide open, nice colors, bokeh is very smooth and pleasing, build quality very high, quick and quiet autofocus, can use a 1.4tc with great results, long warranty.
Cons:
Wish magnification was higher at 300mm, heavy lens, price seems to be rising every week.

I researched this lens for a long time before purchasing it; I have no regrets. Especially helpful in my decision to buy was the Shutterbug review here http://shutterbug.com/equipmentreviews/lenses/0204sb_sigma/ and LightRules excellent site. I shoot sports with the lens wide open all day long and it delivers amazing image quality. Thumbs up.

Apr 4, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add sdgphoto to your Buddy List  
John H Smith
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 20, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 81
Review Date: Mar 2, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: Versatility - no other zoom with this specification. Amazing with a teleconverter. Good warranty service. Excellent value.
Cons:
Sigma needs to work on it's quality control

I don't know of anything else with this specification - ie 300mm f2.8 and zoom. If you can't zoom by moving yourself backwards and forwards, then this has big advantages over primes.

I also got it to use as a 600mm when coupled with a teleconverter. Performance with sigma 2x converter is remarkable: v.good at f5.6 and absolutely superb at f8. If you can't afford a 600mm L, this is very good indeed and certainly the best performance I have ever seen with a 2x converter. In effect I'm using it like two lenses - fast 300mm for sports (handheld or monopod) and a 600mm for wildlife (tripod or beanbag).

Build quality is good, built like a tank. Value for money is excellent.

My only moan is that my copy back focussed on purchase. Only visible at f2.8, but I have much smaller/lighter lenses if I only wanted to use f5.6. Sigma calibrated it free of charge under warranty and it is now spot on. If you get one and it's soft, then either exchange it or get it calibrated. Warranty service was GOOD, but I believe that lenses costing over 1000 should be tested by the factory, not the customer.

I put my overall rating down to 8 because of the quality control. Once working correctly I would rate it as a 9-10.

(I got a non 'DG' model at a much reduced price. Most reviewers say this is every bit as good as the newer DG models. Service center in UK told me that the DG can be software adjusted in their workshop. My non-DG was tested in the UK workshop, but then a circuit board had to be made up at Sigma in Japan and flown over. Obviously slows things down. Small thing, but it is an advantage for the newer DG models)


Mar 2, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add John H Smith to your Buddy List  
Joshua ODonne
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 29, 2006
Location: N/A
Posts: 53
Review Date: Jan 25, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,799.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Price, Sharpness, versatility of f2.8 zoom to 300mm, fast focus, great IQ w/ TCs
Cons:
Hood is much too short, tripod collar is too short and lacks neck strap rings

I recently purchased a 'demo' copy of the non-DG version of this lens. This is my first high-end long glass and I must say it's made a very strong impression on me. My copy is sharp wide open and VERY sharp when stopped down a couple clicks. I frequently use it with a 2x TC and it still remains sharp when used at f8 (looses a little sharpness but not much, very acceptable). With the 1.4x TC there is very little if any noticeable different in IQ. The HSM focusing is rapid and accurate, even when using the 1.4x TC. When using the 2x TC the focusing is noticeably slower but still better than a non-HSM lens. I use it on a D50 so I'm sure it would focus faster on a better camera body. This lens is built like a tank and weighs nearly 3kg. A sturdy tripod or monopod is a must for extended use, however I have had success hand-holding this lens for short periods of time, so long as there's plenty of light to allow for shutter speeds of 1/1000 or greater.

My two complaints are 1) the hood is MUCH too short for what I use this lens for and 2) the tripod collar is less than desirable. I use this lens almost exclusively for bird and other wildlife photography. Living in Florida I experience a lot of harsh light and the hood is much too short for this. I experienced a lot of flare with the original hood, so I made a homemade attachment that goes over the top of the original that fixes this problem. It was a simple and cheap fix but one would think that a lens in the $2K range would come with a suitable hood. Also, the tripod collar that comes with the lens is very short and has no rings for using a neck strap. I purchased the replacement TS-41 collar from Sigma and this is a much better collar. It is taller and the foot is longer, which provides for more stable mounting on my Sidekick. It also allows for attachment of a shoulder strap. This is still not ideal for me, however I make it work.


Jan 25, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Joshua ODonne to your Buddy List  
Pell
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Apr 26, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1592
Review Date: Dec 5, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,525.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Respectably sharp, quick focus, relatively quiet, great build, very good colour and contrast
Cons:
No limiter for AF, could benefit from IS, lack of weather sealing, I am just being picky though

This lens can't be beat for the price for a fast supertelephoto. If it had weather sealing and IS it would simply be perfect! .

It has fast focus although sometimes inconsistent but I wouldn't lose sleep over it or allow that to prevent you from purchasing this lens.

The image quality is very good and the hype in these FM reviews is justified. If you have a 'soft' copy, I would send it in to sigma because it is a great sharp lens considering its a zoom and a Sigma (known for quality control issues) .

Great budget sporting lens! Well worth every penny.


Dec 5, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Pell to your Buddy List  
Carl Auer
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 14, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 9620
Review Date: Oct 28, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,600.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Build quality, size, optics, fast focusing, price
Cons:
Lack of drop in filters, lack of focus limit switch

This is going to be a multi part review on this lens. I had a Sigma 70-200 2.8 that I thought was one of the best lenses ever made. I have been eying the 120-300 since it was released and finally picked a non-dg version up.

I have only shot one event so far, but my first impressions are that it is a great lens. I shot a volleyball game with a 1D at ISO 3200 and the files were sharp and only a few missed shots due to focus. I attribute this to user error because I have not got a handle on this beast yet. I found myself forgetting it was a zoom and just using it at 300mm. Images are bright in the viewfinder, and it appears to lock onto subjects very quickly and accurately. I foresee this being my most used lens for sports and local wildlife.

The lens hood, well, I like it. I have heard a lot of people complain about it, but I like it a lot. It is easy to use and it attaches easily and securely. It might be nice if it was a little longer, but no complaints from me. I would like the lens cap to be designed to use when the lens hood is on or in its reversed position, but I am sure I can come up with a solution.

My next tests with this lens will involve both high school and ECHL hockey and some NCAA D-1 basketball as well as some local wild life and wrestling. I will report more then.


Oct 28, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews View gallery Visit Homepage Add Carl Auer to your Buddy List  
kjorlaug
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 4
Review Date: Sep 9, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: Cheapest 300/2.8 on the market, only 300/2.8 zoom on the market. Excellent sharpness and build quality.
Cons:
Only 210-250mm when focused close.

I swithced from Canon 30D to Nikon D200, so I needed a replacement for my Canon 300mm f/4L IS. I considered the nikon 300mm f/4, but due to the missing IS/VR i wanted a f/2.8 aperture so i went for the sigma 120-300mm.

The sigma is a really great lens, excellent sharpness and build quality. The only neagtive aspect is that the "true" focal length is depending on the focusing distance. I have read some reviews on naturescapes.net and other places which have discovered the same issue (so this is not example variations).

I compared the 120-300mm with a cheap sigma 70-300mm to check the difference. At 3-4m distance, 300mm on the 120-300mm equals only 210mm on the 70-300mm . At 6-7m distance, 300mm on the 120-300mm equals approx 250mm on the 70-300mm. At 15-20mm they are about equal at 300mm.

Possible buyers should be awared of this issue. If you want a 300mm for small birds, this is probably not the lens for you (short subject distance). For sports, larger mammals/birds etc. I can highly recommend this lens!



Sep 9, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add kjorlaug to your Buddy List  
eadesigns
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 8, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 531
Review Date: Sep 1, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: $2,399.00 | Rating: 7 

Pros: Build quality, zoom flexability with near-prime quality.
Cons:
Stiff zoom ring, lens zoom out counterclockwise, AF lacking for low(er) light sports (Prep level and above).

I bought this lens specifically for use for high school football and after a year or more of wanting one, I find myself dissappointed after purchasing it.

During daylit practice, this lens nails the shot and does so with excellent contrast and color. As light falls off, the lens starts to miss a high number of shots (20-30% of my evening shots are OOF). Compared to my 80-200 f2.8 AF-S, I was missing only 3-5%. Summary: This lens is probably fine for daylight sports, but for night sports, I found it lacking on my D70s.

A few curiousities about this lense are that the zoom is opposite of Nikon's 80-200 AF-S. I had a bit of time getting used to that, much less switching between the two. The zoom ring is a bit stiff for my liking, but I suspect that it should loosen up over time.

If you are looking for zoom flexibility with good build quality and shoot daylight action, this could be your excalibur. this lens may perform well for slower sports or events in the evening but it would be a good idea to find a rental or borrow a friends prior to setting down the cash for one of these. This could be a great lens, but the AF speed and accuracy has been too questionable for me.





Sep 1, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add eadesigns to your Buddy List  
mbroihan
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 20, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1
Review Date: Aug 21, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,400.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Image quality, build quality, range, versatility, price relative to 'L' glass.
Cons:
Cost of filters.

My wife is certainly familiar with the costs associated with my wonderful hobby of photography. It's only a hobby so a $2400 on a piece of glass for said hobby certainly has not been the norm. So I finally felt comfortable enough to seek the "kitchen pass" I needed to consumate the deal and ordered this gem from one of the major online retailers.

With great anticipation I opened the box it came in and was immediately impressed with the 105mm lens opening and the quality of the build. I have to admit that I suffered from 'L' glass fever and never considered anything but Canon glass but I wanted something faster and longer than my 70-200 F4L.

Unfortunately the weather was not really cooperating so I couldn't put the lens through its paces but I did manage to verify the low light capabilities of the lens with photos taken of some very uninteresting objects around the house. Tack sharp. Then......the sun came out, I headed for a local nature park and put the lens through its paces. As others have stated previously and shown in their links,the photos were invariably sharp and had that "pop" quality.

Outstanding build quality, outstanding image quality, and excellent range and versatility. At$2400 I was expecting a bit of buyer's remorse. My experience with this lens has not resulted in any.

I believe this will almost certainly become my favorite lens!


Aug 21, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add mbroihan to your Buddy List  
Raskill
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 223
Review Date: Aug 19, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,300.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Solid build. Sharp images. Good focal range. Great price. DG version comes with carry-handle/heavy duty monopod mount.
Cons:
Heavy sucker (just deal with it).

The lens is built like a tank, it is heavy and it is solid and an all metal build. It has the 'crinkle' finish on it that all the Sigma EX range have. The lens hood adds about 80mm to the length of the lens, and is metal constructin also, again with the crinkle finish. Supplied with the lens is a heavy duty tripod foot, that doubles as a carrying handle.

As I said, the lens is built like a tank, it is heavy, feeling more than it's whopping 2.6kg. There is no way you could hold the camera body and not the lens without, I fear, ripping the mount clean out of the body. Because of it's weight, very good long lens technique is needed at the 300mm focal length.

This is a heavy lens, I can't stress that enough. If you lack upper body or wrist strength, this isn't a good choice for you. I shot hand held for the best part of a day and my images suffered towards the end due to muscle fatigue.

Performance wise the Sigma performs like you would expect from a lens of this type.

These pics are from my first outing:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/437503#3747699

The shots I've taken show the lens to be sharp at 300mm and F/2.8, which is what you would wish for. The lens is sharper though around the F/3.2 - F/3.5 mark. The F/2.8 images are sharp even at 100% crop. I don't think the lens is quite as sharp as the 70-200 VR, but it's pretty close.

The bokeh is nice and creamy, and the DOF is thin at F/2.8. It would be a good lens for candid portraits, but possibly a bit to bulky.

The zoom ring is firm, but not stiff and the focus ring is smotth and easily operated with 1 finger. The zoom ring rotates the opposite way to the Nikkor lens, but doesn't take much getting used to.

The reason I got this lens was for motorsports and I know it's going to be a steep learning curve to get used to it. I will have to completely re-learn my panning technique, given the difference between the 70-200VR and this monster. I think that it will be monopod mounted for most shots.

The Sigma 120 - 300 F/ 2.8 offers a good option for sports, with a good focal length and aperture.

All in all, I'm extremely happy with my purchase. If your thinking of a second hand Nikkor or Canon 300mm prime, then give this lens consideration. Other reviews I've read say this lens compares favourably to these primes, but I can't comment, having never had a prime to play with.

Hope someone finds this useful.


Aug 19, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Raskill to your Buddy List  
Photonic
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 678
Review Date: Jun 14, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Fast zoom lens with perfect focal range (on cropped body) for field sports. Extremely sharp.
Cons:
Focal length is shorter than indicated for all useful focussing distances (275mm by my estimation)

I have owned both the Sigma 120-300 /2.8 (non-DG) and the Canon 300/2.8 IS with several months of overlap.

In the end I sold my Canon in favor of the Sigma.

Buyers should beware that there is sample to sample variation on the Sigma. I personally tested three different non-DG lenses. Two were perfect, one was a dog. I have also compared photos (8x10) from the same soccer game with a DG version and neither I nor the owner of that lens can distinguish between them.

I was unable to find any meaningful IQ difference between the Canon and Sigma. As a big Canon fan I remain tempted to give an ever so slight sharpness/contrast edge to the Canon but the images really do not support that assertion. Never the less, even if it is only psychological, I am going to give an edge to the Canon for IQ. I use the Sigma for sports (soccer mostly) and find the autofocus speed to be totally up to the task. I did not do an A/B comparison with the Canon but I am very pleased with the Sigma speed.

For all focus distances of interest (non-infinity) the Sigma is more like a 275mm in my estimation. This seems like a gross bit of false advertising, but I went in with my eyes open and others should as well. The zoom ring rotates in the opposite direction from Canon which takes some getting use to. I have two other Sigma lenses and both of them rotate effortlessly in the tripod collar. In fact I like the Sigma collar design much more than Canon's (you can pop the lens out instantly). For some reason, the collar on my 120-300 (I am using the larger upgrade version) is sticky and really is driving me nuts (this may be a matter of finding the right lubricant which I intend to investigate). The Sigma is heavy and for extended shooting you will want a support but it is fine for hand holding for short periods of time.

The distinguishing feature of this Sigma to me is the zoom. You can not zoom with your feet on to a soccer field or into a lake. The range is perfect on a cropped body for field sports. I also use on a FF body for head and shoulder portraiture with great results wide open. The lack of IS is a non-issue for sports use but you may miss it for other applications.

For my mostly sports applications, the Sigma offers greater versatility, lower cost and equal IQ to ANY other lens I have evaluated. Canon should take notice of this lens and respond with a zoom in this range with IS.


Jun 14, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Photonic to your Buddy List  
RikWriter
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jun 22, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2502
Review Date: May 27, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,834.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharpness, quickness and accuracy of focus, image quality, price, weight.
Cons:
Funky leather lens hood, no cap, tripod mount is a bit on the awkward side.

I needed a good wildlife lens and couldn't afford to spring for a 500mm f4 or f4.5, so I compromised and bought the 120-300 f2.8 and a Sigma 2x teleconverter, looking to get 600mm at f5.6 or even 840mm at f8 in a pinch by stacking my Tamron 1.4X TC with the 2X. I figured I would lose a bit of IQ with the TC, but I would have to live with it until I won the lottery.
Well, the IQ of this lens is just INCREDIBLE. The Sigma 2X TC lives on this lens now and whenever I set up my tripod for bird shots, this is the lens that mounts it. It's incredibly versatile, giving me the option of a superfast 300mm f2.8 for low light and sports, a 420mm f4 for medium-distance wildlife and sports in good light with the 1.4X TC, and a 600mm f5.6 with the 2X TC for long distance shots.
I like the lens so much I wound up selling my Canon 70-200 f2.8L since I realized I just wasn't using it anymore.
If the Sigma weren't nearly 6lbs and thus a bit too much to hand-hold, I would have sold my 100-400L also, but I am keeping it for hiking and hand-holding.
I've also come to appreciate the versatility of having a zoom. There've been times when I am taking a picture of a waterbird and it flies closer to me, and I have to adjust the zoom to bring it back to a good composition, something I wouldn't be able to do with a prime.
The only things I dislike about this lens are the tripod collar (mine is the non-DG and came with the old style collar, which I might wind up replacing eventually with the new style) and the stupid leather lens hood that came with the lens in lieu of a cap. I ditched the hood and bought a Mamiya 105mm locking lens cap for $10 on ebay that fits perfectly.
This is just one heck of a lens for the money. I recommend it highly.


May 27, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add RikWriter to your Buddy List  
allanbaden
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Apr 5, 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 0
Review Date: Apr 5, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Solid, Well build, Sharp, very nice to work with and very versitile.
Cons:
A little heavy

Great for many things. Use it a lot for sports with or whitout 1.4 konverter with great sharp results at 2.8 and 4.0 aperature. Its great on 1D.

Apr 5, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add allanbaden to your Buddy List  
zzrdave
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 3, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Mar 30, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,100.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Price - Reach - 2.8 - Zoom - Build - Speed - Black blends better with the 20d
Cons:
Focus is quirky - Lens Hood - Filters

I'm new into the dslr world, so I don't have any thing else to compare my experience too, but I can say that there is a learning curve with this lense. My first opportunity to try this lense out was at a indoors rodeo practice a few weeks back. I was shooting in servo mode and zooming away. To keep up with the horses in the availiable light, I was shooting at 1/250, f2.8 @ 1600 iso. My images were hit and miss upon review. The ones that were good were spot on, the others were either front focused or back focused a bit. I was disappointed. So to the forums I went and discovered the intricacies of this lense. You have to re-focus after you change focal length. It works! I also discovered that using the custom function to move auto focus to the ae button is a must - and after using it like this for several weeks, I like it on all my shoots. I also learned that the dof is still quite shallow at 2.8 - even at 75 - 100 yards subject distance. Another education on my part. I also have taken some shots at church, which is not camera friendly. Dark paneling, dim lighting, etc., Shooting at 1600 and 3200 iso is really a bad way to try out a new lens, but the images turned out pretty well given the circumstances. And the reach is great to be able to stay in the back of the church and not walking in front of others. The only lens/image comparison I can do is with images taken with my 24-70L - which are mostly portraits. The Canon has a bit more contrast and is a bit sharper, but I haven't used the Sigma for close ups as of yet. I do love the bokeh the Sigma gives! I have the DG version along with the Sigma EX uv and Circular Polarizer. At a recent air show, the Sigma done very well! I would like to compare it to a Canon prime someday, just to see, but for now I am very happy and axious to get to some little league games and shoot at a reasonable ISO. Build is superb, although I can say I noticed some looseness on a particulary cold practice night at the arena. It was in the upper 30's and there was just a bit of movement (tiny) between the camera and lense. Just an observation. It is heavy - what lens like this isn't! I use a tripod and ball head and it works very well for panning and keeping up with the action. Hand holding - well it's not for me. Zoom and manual focus feel perfect, smooth and precise. All in all - I am pleased and can't wait to use it again.

Mar 30, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add zzrdave to your Buddy List  




Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 EX DG HSM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
93 328275 Nov 1, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
82% of reviewers $2,114.63
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.31
9.50
9.1
120_300_1_


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6  next