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 Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive 
Thread started 21 Sep 2010 (Tuesday) 04:37
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 EX OS

 
ricleo
Member
Avatar
55 posts
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Singapore
     
Aug 17, 2013 06:18 |  #3976

saw the moon in the evening today. 840mm F8 - Sigma 120-300 sport + canon 2X iii + kenko 1.4 dgx

resized (no crop)

IMAGE: http://imageshack.us/a/img14/3336/8rxp.jpg

cropped
IMAGE: http://imageshack.us/a/img153/1061/t5lq.jpg

100% crop (no sharpening)
IMAGE: http://imageshack.us/a/img821/1294/2vbj.jpg

5DIII|16-35L|Σ50Art|50L|135L|Σ150Macro|Σ120-300S|Σ2xDG|Σ1.4xDG
A7S|CV12II|CV35 1.2|FE35|CV50_1.5|FE55​|FD85_1.2L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
ricleo
Member
Avatar
55 posts
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Singapore
     
Aug 17, 2013 06:20 |  #3977

Brummel wrote in post #16215179 (external link)
No thats impossible. The newer Sport-model has approximately 2 centimeters more in diameter than the older EX-model.

thanks brummel


5DIII|16-35L|Σ50Art|50L|135L|Σ150Macro|Σ120-300S|Σ2xDG|Σ1.4xDG
A7S|CV12II|CV35 1.2|FE35|CV50_1.5|FE55​|FD85_1.2L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ricleo
Member
Avatar
55 posts
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Singapore
     
Aug 17, 2013 06:29 |  #3978

Thanks Frogfish. is the one below the nisi you are talking about? noticed it is not multi-coated and the cheapest i could find on ebay was US$50. May just buy a Sigma 105mm filter.

IMAGE: http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NTAwWDUwMA==/z/Mw4AAMXQSnVRbPvk/$T2eC16JHJGkFFm04!TsDBRbPvko,V!~~60_3.JPG

Frogfish_Shanghai wrote in post #16215274 (external link)
I absolutely agree with this for general shooting. However there are circumstances when a UV filter is a must, unless you like your front element sand-blown or soaked in salt water for a few hours !

For shooting on beaches/dunes or on small boats (for seabirds) I used the Nisi 105mm (plus the hood) and I didn't see any degradation - the Nisi is substantially cheaper than the name brands and cost me ca. US$30.


5DIII|16-35L|Σ50Art|50L|135L|Σ150Macro|Σ120-300S|Σ2xDG|Σ1.4xDG
A7S|CV12II|CV35 1.2|FE35|CV50_1.5|FE55​|FD85_1.2L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Frogfish_Shanghai
Member
69 posts
Joined Mar 2013
     
Aug 17, 2013 06:31 |  #3979

ricleo wrote in post #16215465 (external link)
Thanks Frogfish. is the one below the nisi you are talking about? noticed it is not multi-coated and the cheapest i could find on ebay was US$50. May just buy a Sigma 105mm filter.

Yes. Exactly. Not a single flare from 3 hours on the boat or when used on the beach. All with the hood in place of course.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dufflover
Senior Member
Avatar
315 posts
Joined Nov 2012
Location: Australia
     
Aug 17, 2013 09:13 |  #3980

Would you buy any chance still have the file comparisons between no filter and with your Vivitar filter? Just interested in how it makes the image worse as some filters/lenses may behave "worse" in different ways; like some flare more, or halo more, or mess up the AF, or weird fuzzy pattern, etc.


"Duffman, could you bring in two bottles of smooth, untainted DUFF?""Oh Yeah!"
Main gear: Canon 7D, Canon 60D, Sig 120-300/2.8 OS, Can 100-400, Can 70-200/2.8L II, Can 1.4x-II, Can 2x-III, Tam 17-50/2.8, Tam 90/2.8 macro

My Flickr (feel free to critique!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ricleo
Member
Avatar
55 posts
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Singapore
     
Aug 17, 2013 09:22 |  #3981

dufflover wrote in post #16215702 (external link)
Would you buy any chance still have the file comparisons between no filter and with your Vivitar filter? Just interested in how it makes the image worse as some filters/lenses may behave "worse" in different ways; like some flare more, or halo more, or mess up the AF, or weird fuzzy pattern, etc.

I trashed the images from my camera when i saw the results. Will try to take some tomorrow morning and post a comparison. I was using the 2X TC that time, not sure if it enlarged/worsened the image degradation.


5DIII|16-35L|Σ50Art|50L|135L|Σ150Macro|Σ120-300S|Σ2xDG|Σ1.4xDG
A7S|CV12II|CV35 1.2|FE35|CV50_1.5|FE55​|FD85_1.2L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
Avatar
7,640 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 1061
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Toledo, OH
     
Aug 17, 2013 11:32 |  #3982

ricleo, just FYI, make sure your posted images do not exceed 1024 pixels in the longer dimension. That's the rule and the mods are watching :)


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
ricleo
Member
Avatar
55 posts
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Singapore
     
Aug 17, 2013 15:08 |  #3983

gabebalazs wrote in post #16216010 (external link)
ricleo, just FYI, make sure your posted images do not exceed 1024 pixels in the longer dimension. That's the rule and the mods are watching :)

opps noted for future posts, my bad for not reading the posting rules/faqs


5DIII|16-35L|Σ50Art|50L|135L|Σ150Macro|Σ120-300S|Σ2xDG|Σ1.4xDG
A7S|CV12II|CV35 1.2|FE35|CV50_1.5|FE55​|FD85_1.2L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pepe ­ Guitarra
Senior Member
Avatar
800 posts
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Southern California
     
Aug 17, 2013 16:49 as a reply to  @ ricleo's post |  #3984

Sigma 120-300+2cTC on 1DIII:


IMAGE: http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3753/9332838640_4dbe079934_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/palenquero/9332​838640/  (external link)
Nutmeg Mannikin (Lunchura Punchulata) (external link) by Palenquero (external link), on Flickr

It's not a photo until you print it! :cool:
Click here (external link), this is myflickr (external link) gallery

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Frogfish_Shanghai
Member
69 posts
Joined Mar 2013
     
Aug 17, 2013 19:26 |  #3985

Superb Pepe ! Over here (Asia) they are called Scaly Munia, wonderful little birds.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pax2You
Goldmember
Avatar
1,272 posts
Gallery: 68 photos
Likes: 2948
Joined Oct 2011
     
Aug 17, 2013 23:34 as a reply to  @ Frogfish_Shanghai's post |  #3986

Excellent job Pepe!


Panasonic G9, Panaleica 100-400, Samyang 12mm F2 NCS CS, 7Artisans 7.5mm f2.8 fisheye, Panagor 90mm f2.8 Macro (OM), Sigma APO 2x DG EX TC, Tiffen aXent ND 3.0 (ND1000) filter, Olympus OMD E-M5, Oly 14-42mm, Oly 12-50mm, ZEQ25gt Mount, plus a few other lenses, extension tubes, and general mish-mash

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dufflover
Senior Member
Avatar
315 posts
Joined Nov 2012
Location: Australia
     
Aug 18, 2013 01:16 |  #3987

ricleo wrote in post #16215717 (external link)
I trashed the images from my camera when i saw the results. Will try to take some tomorrow morning and post a comparison. I was using the 2X TC that time, not sure if it enlarged/worsened the image degradation.

hehe doesn't matter then. no need to go out of your way to do that :-)


"Duffman, could you bring in two bottles of smooth, untainted DUFF?""Oh Yeah!"
Main gear: Canon 7D, Canon 60D, Sig 120-300/2.8 OS, Can 100-400, Can 70-200/2.8L II, Can 1.4x-II, Can 2x-III, Tam 17-50/2.8, Tam 90/2.8 macro

My Flickr (feel free to critique!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ricleo
Member
Avatar
55 posts
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Singapore
     
Aug 18, 2013 01:21 |  #3988

dufflover wrote in post #16215702 (external link)
Would you buy any chance still have the file comparisons between no filter and with your Vivitar filter? Just interested in how it makes the image worse as some filters/lenses may behave "worse" in different ways; like some flare more, or halo more, or mess up the AF, or weird fuzzy pattern, etc.

as requested. comparisons with and without the filter. both are 100% crops without sharpening/processing, default portrait picture style.
Both filter and no filter shots were repeated 5 times with the same results, shot on my carbon fibre tripod with a gimbal head. shutterspeeds are high enough to counter any potential wind movements at 1/2500 for bare lens and 1/500 for TC shots.

with the bare lens, the difference is very subtle. image quality is impacted slightly. left shot with filter, right shot without

IMAGE: http://imageshack.us/a/img163/5100/xxqo.jpg

with the 2X TC, the difference is enlarged. left shot with filter, right shot without
IMAGE: http://imageshack.us/a/img841/7499/iqeu.jpg

5DIII|16-35L|Σ50Art|50L|135L|Σ150Macro|Σ120-300S|Σ2xDG|Σ1.4xDG
A7S|CV12II|CV35 1.2|FE35|CV50_1.5|FE55​|FD85_1.2L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dufflover
Senior Member
Avatar
315 posts
Joined Nov 2012
Location: Australia
     
Aug 18, 2013 08:31 |  #3989

Thanks for taking the time to repeat the testing.
Very telling result, and wouldn't have expected that given the bare lens test is pretty passable to me! Almost looks like the AF missed in the TC shot, but not 5 times ...


"Duffman, could you bring in two bottles of smooth, untainted DUFF?""Oh Yeah!"
Main gear: Canon 7D, Canon 60D, Sig 120-300/2.8 OS, Can 100-400, Can 70-200/2.8L II, Can 1.4x-II, Can 2x-III, Tam 17-50/2.8, Tam 90/2.8 macro

My Flickr (feel free to critique!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
Avatar
7,640 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 1061
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Toledo, OH
     
Aug 18, 2013 08:57 |  #3990

Pictures from shooting at the river yesterday. Still looking for my strong contender entries for this year's regional photo contest (got a lot of pressure on me after sweeping the local fauna category last year : ) )
I wouldn't say these are award winning material yet, but maybe tomorrow...

IMAGE: http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2892/9538748002_8721d834d0_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/29108710@N04/9​538748002/  (external link)
GBH on Maumee 9 (external link) by gabebalazs (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7432/9538749210_791ab33c5a_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/29108710@N04/9​538749210/  (external link)
GBH on Maumee 2 (external link) by gabebalazs (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7323/9538748522_c8c7781d50_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/29108710@N04/9​538748522/  (external link)
Great Egret Portrait 1 (external link) by gabebalazs (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3804/9535962225_914fde2ab5_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/29108710@N04/9​535962225/  (external link)
GBH on Maumee 6 (external link) by gabebalazs (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5509/9535960993_b5159d7618_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/29108710@N04/9​535960993/  (external link)
GBH on Maumee 12 (external link) by gabebalazs (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5518/9535961059_0e96454228_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/29108710@N04/9​535961059/  (external link)
Great Egret Pooping (external link) by gabebalazs (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5330/9538749642_401cfc6423_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/29108710@N04/9​538749642/  (external link)
GBH on Maumee 7 (external link) by gabebalazs (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2876/9535961853_d47412913d_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/29108710@N04/9​535961853/  (external link)
GBH on Maumee 3 (external link) by gabebalazs (external link), on Flickr

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

1,517,375 views & 368 likes for this thread
Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 EX OS
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive 
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 ddoeing1
1088 guests, 323 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.