everyone said the optical qualities would be the same as the previous model...this seems to say it's significantly better:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …f-2.8-DG-OS-HSM-Lens.aspx
from review wrote:
Based on what I was initially hearing and understanding about this lens, I figured I'd pick up a 120-300 "S", capture the standard image quality test results, use it a little bit, write a little bit and move it along. But, my plans changed – especially after I saw the image quality this lens delivered. I'm quite pleased with what Sigma has done with this lens model.
It is hard not to like a great looking lens with a 120-300mm focal length range in a non-extending, solidly built body that also feels great – and delivers image quality that leaves most other zoom lenses wanting even at this lens' wide max f/2.8 aperture. I like the direction Sigma has been going with their recent lenses and I think they have another hit with the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Lens.
Based on what I was initially hearing and understanding about this lens, I figured I'd pick up a 120-300 "S", capture the standard image quality test results, use it a little bit, write a little bit and move it along. But, my plans changed – especially after I saw the image quality this lens delivered. I'm quite pleased with what Sigma has done with this lens model.
It is hard not to like a great looking lens with a 120-300mm focal length range in a non-extending, solidly built body that also feels great – and delivers image quality that leaves most other zoom lenses wanting even at this lens' wide max f/2.8 aperture. I like the direction Sigma has been going with their recent lenses and I think they have another hit with the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Lens.
i'll await lensguy's inevitable "sigma sucks" post...
