Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 22 Aug 2010 (Sunday) 22:33
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

siggy 120-300 2.8 vs 300 2.8

 
Camera ­ Nerd
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
935 posts
Joined Nov 2009
     
Aug 23, 2010 10:54 |  #16

plasticmotif wrote in post #10769896 (external link)
The 120-300 is a great lens. Lens rentals did have problems with it's AF breaking but they suspected it was how they were shipping it.

Canon does not service the older non-IS version.

Is 300 f4 IS an option?

no i shoot sports and IS doesnt do anything for sports such as soccer, baseball etc. the 300 f4 would not be a very smart choice as i would be needing a 2.8 anyway


canon 7d, canon 5d classic, 24-70 2.8 L, 70-200 2.8 (non-is) L, .
my flickr http://www.flickr.com/​photos/51827770@N04/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Sam|McGuire
Senior Member
Avatar
865 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Burlington, VT 05401
     
Aug 23, 2010 11:21 |  #17

Why not get a 70-200 F/2.8 IS II+tc? It would give you excellent image quality, more versatility, and would be right in your budget.


Canon 5DII| 35L | 16-35LII |24-70L |70-200 F/2.8 IS LII | Alien Bees | CPS Member
Flickr  (external link)
www.moralfibers.co (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Camera ­ Nerd
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
935 posts
Joined Nov 2009
     
Aug 23, 2010 11:28 |  #18

Sam|McGuire wrote in post #10772106 (external link)
Why not get a 70-200 F/2.8 IS II+tc? It would give you excellent image quality, more versatility, and would be right in your budget.

already have 70-200 2.8 and im going to add a 1.4 tc this fall, but towards winter, ill purchase the siggy or 300 2.8 non IS, as im using these for sports specifically and well with the 1.4 tc it becomes a 100-280f4, while 2.8 is crucial for sports, even during the day not just night games to keep the shutter at 1/640 at least.


canon 7d, canon 5d classic, 24-70 2.8 L, 70-200 2.8 (non-is) L, .
my flickr http://www.flickr.com/​photos/51827770@N04/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AmbientMike
Member
50 posts
Joined May 2010
     
Aug 23, 2010 12:25 |  #19

I've never used either, but canon's 300/2.8 is supposed to be really really good, best of the japanese and might beat the german. The sigma zooms. Whichever you prefer. You already have the 70-200, could you use that when you need a zoom?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sam|McGuire
Senior Member
Avatar
865 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Burlington, VT 05401
     
Aug 23, 2010 12:32 |  #20

Camera Nerd wrote in post #10772142 (external link)
already have 70-200 2.8 and im going to add a 1.4 tc this fall, but towards winter, ill purchase the siggy or 300 2.8 non IS, as im using these for sports specifically and well with the 1.4 tc it becomes a 100-280f4, while 2.8 is crucial for sports, even during the day not just night games to keep the shutter at 1/640 at least.

The 70-200 F/2.8 non IS and the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II are completely different lenses. The II+tc would have as good, if not better, image quality as the 300 or the siggy.


Canon 5DII| 35L | 16-35LII |24-70L |70-200 F/2.8 IS LII | Alien Bees | CPS Member
Flickr  (external link)
www.moralfibers.co (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
20,506 posts
Likes: 3473
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Aug 23, 2010 13:03 |  #21

Sam|McGuire wrote in post #10772496 (external link)
The 70-200 F/2.8 non IS and the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II are completely different lenses. The II+tc would have as good, if not better, image quality as the 300 or the siggy.

70-200mm f2.8IS II with 1.4xTC as good as canon 300mm f2.8 non IS. Seems never used a canon supertele before.


Fuji XT-1, 18-55mm
Sony A7rIV, , Tamron 28-200mm, Sigma 40mm f1.4 Art FE, Sony 85mm f1.8 FE, Sigma 105mm f1.4 Art FE
Fuji GFX50s, 23mm f4, 32-64mm, 45mm f2.8, 110mm f2, 120mm f4 macro
Canon 24mm TSE-II, 85mm f1.2 L II, 90mm TSE-II Macro, 300mm f2.8 IS I

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Camera ­ Nerd
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
935 posts
Joined Nov 2009
     
Aug 23, 2010 13:09 |  #22

Sam|McGuire wrote in post #10772496 (external link)
The 70-200 F/2.8 non IS and the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II are completely different lenses. The II+tc would have as good, if not better, image quality as the 300 or the siggy.

uhm i detest to that simply because well at 300mm you are @ 2.8 with the prime tele, and the 70-200 2.8 IS II (although a great lens) is at f4 at 280mm, so thats a whole fstop difference, the difference between getting a blurry shot and stopping the action, not to mention the 300 2.8 has been argued as the best lens made by canon ever so. Plus the 70-200 2.8 Non Is that I have takes a 1.4 tc pretty well, though the 2x tc is better on the 70-200 2.8 IS II, which i dont think i would use as f5.6 is a pretty slow fstop for sports.


canon 7d, canon 5d classic, 24-70 2.8 L, 70-200 2.8 (non-is) L, .
my flickr http://www.flickr.com/​photos/51827770@N04/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sam|McGuire
Senior Member
Avatar
865 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Burlington, VT 05401
     
Aug 23, 2010 14:43 |  #23

bobbyz wrote in post #10772664 (external link)
70-200mm f2.8IS II with 1.4xTC as good as canon 300mm f2.8 non IS. Seems never used a canon supertele before.

Actually, I have. However, it seems you've never used the 70-200mm F/2.8 IS II before. It's THAT good. :)


Canon 5DII| 35L | 16-35LII |24-70L |70-200 F/2.8 IS LII | Alien Bees | CPS Member
Flickr  (external link)
www.moralfibers.co (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
minkynuts
Junior Member
24 posts
Joined Jul 2003
Location: Ireland
     
Aug 23, 2010 15:07 |  #24

As I have said in another thread at the moment I have both the Canon 300 2.8 and the sigma 120-300mm 2.8 you cannot tell the difference in image quality between them and I posted two images , one from each to show what I mean
Rob




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
20,506 posts
Likes: 3473
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Aug 23, 2010 15:16 |  #25

Sam|McGuire wrote in post #10773219 (external link)
Actually, I have. However, it seems you've never used the 70-200mm F/2.8 IS II before. It's THAT good. :)

All I can say is if you are happy that's is fine. Different folks different standards.


Fuji XT-1, 18-55mm
Sony A7rIV, , Tamron 28-200mm, Sigma 40mm f1.4 Art FE, Sony 85mm f1.8 FE, Sigma 105mm f1.4 Art FE
Fuji GFX50s, 23mm f4, 32-64mm, 45mm f2.8, 110mm f2, 120mm f4 macro
Canon 24mm TSE-II, 85mm f1.2 L II, 90mm TSE-II Macro, 300mm f2.8 IS I

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CountryBoy
"Tired of Goldmember label"
Avatar
5,168 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Okie
     
Aug 23, 2010 15:18 |  #26

Sam|McGuire wrote in post #10773219 (external link)
Actually, I have. However, it seems you've never used the 70-200mm F/2.8 IS II before. It's THAT good. :)

I just can't see the 70-200mm with a tc keeping up with the prime or Sigma zoom . Af wise that is .


Hi

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
20,506 posts
Likes: 3473
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Aug 23, 2010 15:18 |  #27

minkynuts wrote in post #10773351 (external link)
As I have said in another thread at the moment I have both the Canon 300 2.8 and the sigma 120-300mm 2.8 you cannot tell the difference in image quality between them and I posted two images , one from each to show what I mean
Rob

Rob, try them for real life shots with subject in motion coming at you. And then compare your keeper rate. Siggy is fine lens on static subjects but has problems when in AI servo mode.

If your 300mm f2.8 non IS is not sharper than the siggy, you have very very good siggy and a canon which needs some minor calibration.


Fuji XT-1, 18-55mm
Sony A7rIV, , Tamron 28-200mm, Sigma 40mm f1.4 Art FE, Sony 85mm f1.8 FE, Sigma 105mm f1.4 Art FE
Fuji GFX50s, 23mm f4, 32-64mm, 45mm f2.8, 110mm f2, 120mm f4 macro
Canon 24mm TSE-II, 85mm f1.2 L II, 90mm TSE-II Macro, 300mm f2.8 IS I

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rimwalker
Member
133 posts
Joined Jun 2008
     
Aug 23, 2010 18:01 |  #28

I recall reviews saying the Sigma 120-300 had sluggish autofocus, to the point of being prohibitive for sports, has that been the experience of owners here?


Canon 70D & 40D, 10-22, 15-85, 50 1.8, 70-200 F4, 400 5.6

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
20,506 posts
Likes: 3473
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Aug 23, 2010 18:11 |  #29

Rimwalker wrote in post #10774335 (external link)
I recall reviews saying the Sigma 120-300 had sluggish autofocus, to the point of being prohibitive for sports, has that been the experience of owners here?

Good copies are quite good not canon 300/400mm good but almost there.


Fuji XT-1, 18-55mm
Sony A7rIV, , Tamron 28-200mm, Sigma 40mm f1.4 Art FE, Sony 85mm f1.8 FE, Sigma 105mm f1.4 Art FE
Fuji GFX50s, 23mm f4, 32-64mm, 45mm f2.8, 110mm f2, 120mm f4 macro
Canon 24mm TSE-II, 85mm f1.2 L II, 90mm TSE-II Macro, 300mm f2.8 IS I

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GSH
"wetter than an otter's pocket"
Avatar
3,939 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Nov 2004
Location: NE England.
     
Aug 23, 2010 18:14 |  #30

Rimwalker wrote in post #10774335 (external link)
I recall reviews saying the Sigma 120-300 had sluggish autofocus, to the point of being prohibitive for sports, has that been the experience of owners here?

Football (Soccer if you must)
Rugby
Jetskis (Racing & Freestyle)
Motorsport (Bikes, Circuit Racing & Forest Rallies)
Airshows.

On a 20D, 50D, 1DMKIIN & 7D.

I've done all the above and the 120-300 has always produced the goods.


Geoff www.bhppix.co.uk (external link)
_______________
I enjoy taking photos. I don't claim to be any good at it :D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,155 views & 0 likes for this thread
siggy 120-300 2.8 vs 300 2.8
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is josenarciso
395 guests, 248 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.