p.1 #10 · Sigma 120-300 Sport Bare & with 2x TC III
JohnBrose wrote:
How is the focus speed and accuracy? Can you compare it to any other lenses? Did you get the docking attachment?
Did not get the USB dock and don't tink it's needed, speed slightly slower than my 70-200 MkII with and w/o the TCs mounted (SWAG), accuracy is outstanding both stationary and tracking...have not needed to use the limiter yet. I've found no focus shift based on distance or focal range, dialed +4 wide and +4 Tele bare (all my L glass is in the same range) It is heavy, very heavy but balances well with a 1D body.
p.1 #11 · Sigma 120-300 Sport Bare & with 2x TC III
Tom Sweeney wrote:
Did not get the USB dock and don't tink it's needed, speed slightly slower than my 70-200 MkII with and w/o the TCs mounted (SWAG), accuracy is outstanding both stationary and tracking...have not needed to use the limiter yet. I've found no focus shift based on distance or focal range, dialed +4 wide and +4 Tele bare (all my L glass is in the same range) It is heavy, very heavy but balances well with a 1D body.
Tom,
Certainly nothing to whine about in those pix! I'm seriously considering this lens to supplement my 70-200 f/2.8L II as 200mm just doesn't reach across the field or to the fence. If you get a chance, I'd really appreciate it if you'd post some lower light action shots and give your feelings on its AF, acquisition speed, and anything else.
I shoot and report sports for a (very) small town newspaper. Every football field in the league is dark, darker, darkest and let's not even talk about the gyms The 70-200 does OK though f/2.8 is generally at least a stop, stop and a half too dark. FB and BB both need more reach.
As for heavy, shrug, if you're toting a 1D anything (and I sometimes work 2), it's all in the mind. (At least that's what I tell myself at the end of 2.5 hour night game in 100F + degrees
Would really appreciate feedback/assessment from anyone using this lens for action in low or bad light.
p.1 #12 · Sigma 120-300 Sport Bare & with 2x TC III
dalegaspi wrote:
wait...is that the newest version? i thought they aren't shipping yet?
bh had the Canon mount in stock for a few minutes on Thursday. I grabbed one. It showed up late Friday but it's been downpouring here all weekend. Might try to sneak out in the yard today if it clears up a little although the birds and squirrels seem to be celebrating memorial day at home with their families. No wildlife in sight!
As for the lens, it's got the same great look and finish as the 35 1.4 does. I don't know about earlier versions of the 120-300 but the lens hood twists on then there's the knob to tighten it down. I kind of like that, although mine wasn't tightened down when it shipped. Nothing was damaged or scratched though so I'm fine.
p.1 #17 · Sigma 120-300 Sport Bare & with 2x TC III
Shots look sweet Tom.
I bought the MkII version (not the Sport which is v3 though optically they are supposed to be the same) with OS, about 4 months ago and love this lens, I took it (and TCs - both the Sigma ones seem to be best, and from the long long thread on POTN the Canon ones don't work as well with it, though I had the Nikon x1.4 and Sigma 2.0) on a near 6 week trip to NZ and used it almost every day for everything from portrait, landscapes and of course it's main use, birding), it performed flawlessly bar some front focusing in certain conditions (with birds), my mistake for not setting it up with FoCal before I went.
I'm interested in your comment on the focus breathing though as I've found that with the x2.0 the FL is certainly not 600mm at infinity (and really about 500mm) comparing to my Sigma 500).
p.1 #18 · Sigma 120-300 Sport Bare & with 2x TC III
that last shot with the TC is impressive. my experience with zooms + TC is ho-hum even stopped down; this certainly changes that perception.
it's a bargain at that price, even with the huge markup between this and the older lens (even with no change in optical formula).
I hope the rumored 135/1.8 would knock it out of the park as well...if it's got APO then Zeiss has a formidable opponent...Sigma's 35/1.4 equals/beats (depending on who you ask) the Zeiss equivalent at the fraction of the price.
p.1 #19 · Sigma 120-300 Sport Bare & with 2x TC III
dalegaspi wrote:
that last shot with the TC is impressive. my experience with zooms + TC is ho-hum even stopped down; this certainly changes that perception.
it's a bargain at that price, even with the huge markup between this and the older lens (even with no change in optical formula).
I hope the rumored 135/1.8 would knock it out of the park as well...if it's got APO then Zeiss has a formidable opponent...Sigma's 35/1.4 equals/beats (depending on who you ask) the Zeiss equivalent at the fraction of the price.
it's good to have choices!
Tell me about it, its essentially a 600 f/5.6 under $4000. Plus it zooms, lol. A 240-600 would be a spectacular range for wild life.
The 70-200 does OK though f/2.8 is generally at least a stop, stop and a half too dark. FB and BB both need more reach.