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 21 Jan 2012 (Saturday) 21:06
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Sigma 120-300 os vs 70-200L mkii w/ extender

 
skater911
Goldmember
Avatar
1,279 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Dec 2006
     
Jan 21, 2012 21:06 |  #1

Now that I have the 70-200mkii and 100-400 I was trying to think of a way to reduce these to one lens. However, after reading a lot about the 70-200 w/ extender not being as good as 100-400 at 400 I don't think I want to get rid of mine.

This is more of a question because I can't see myself getting rid of these two lens for a while, but how is the iq of the sigma compared to the 70-200l mkii without extenders and then secondly how is the sigma with either a 1.4 or 2x extender compared to the 100-400?

Thanks,

Richard


Nikon D850 l Nikon 28 1.4E l Nikon 50 1.8 g l Nikon 24-120 F4 l Tamron 100-400 l

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
Avatar
7,640 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 1061
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Toledo, OH
     
Jan 21, 2012 22:05 |  #2

I owned the 100-400L, a very good copy of it. I currently own the Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS and the 120-300 2.8 OS. Here are my thoughts.

1. The Sigma 70-200 OS is slightly inferior to the Canon 70-200 2.8 II (and a bit better than the Mk I version). With my Sigma 2x TC it is not as good as my 100-400L was, no surprise there.

2. The Sigma 120-300 2.8 OS is an awesome zoom lens, beats my 70-200 OS in sharpness and contrast. It takes TCs well. The Canon 70-200 II + 1.4x TC would have a very hard time to match the Sigma (without extenders) and is a stop slower too. However great the Canon is, I just can't imagine beating the Sigma with a 1.4x TC attached to the Canon, making it an f/4 lens.

3. The Sigma + 1.4x TC beats the Canon 100-400L in IQ, and matches it in AF speed (based on experience). Plus it is a 420mm f/4 combo, a stop faster than the 100-400L. In this configuration the 70-200 II + 2x TC is clearly beaten by the Sigma + 1.4 TC.

4. The Sigma takes a 2x TC relatively well too, making it a 600mm f/5.6 lens. Now, it will not be as sharp as a Canon 600mm f/4, or 500 f/4 + 1.4x TC, but it is usable, I use this combination all the time. This is a territory the 100-400L or the 70-200 II + TC cannot really touch.

5. WEIGHT - Big issue, you won't walk around for long time with the Sigma 120-300. You can, I did a few times but if convenience is a priority, the Canon 100-400L is much much better. Not having the 100-400L any more, I use my 70-200 OS + a TC for that purpose. not as good but sometimes convenience wins over IQ. the Sigma 70-200 + 2x TC is pretty decent at f/6.3 and good at f/8 (but again not as good as my 100-400L was).

My suggestion is to check out the "Sigma unveils 120-300..." thread. There are many many photos taken with the lens with and without TCs.


SONY A7RIII | SONY A7III | SONY RX10 IV | SONY RX100 | 24-70 2.8 GM | 70-200 2.8 GM | 16-35 F/4 | PZ 18-105 F/4 | FE 85 1.8 | FE 28-70 | SIGMA 35 1.4 ART | SIGMA 150-600 C | ROKINON 14 2.8
Gabe Balazs Photo (external link)
Nature Shots Portfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
haliapsychologika
Member
133 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 50
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Athens, Greece
     
Jan 22, 2012 07:17 as a reply to  @ gabebalazs's post |  #3

I own a 7d and the 70-200 II.Looking for the best way to go to 400mm I tried few combinations.70-200 + 2x II extender was at least equally sharp to any of the 100-400s I checked. The only drawback is that AF slowed down a bit. After trying the 400 5.6L prime I decided to go that way. Sharper than 100-400 or 70-200 + 2x wide open and much better focus tracking as well as faster AF. Never used the sigma so I have no opinion on that one.
Hope this hels a bit...




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

1,453 views & 0 likes for this thread
Sigma 120-300 os vs 70-200L mkii w/ extender
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 Naturographers
1085 guests, 337 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.