Which SIGMA 120-300/2.8? Hard to decide!

Hi
I am in a difficult decision of lenses. My area of ​​the shooting is wilderness. Very grouse / grouse and wild but also very bird in the sanctuary. I have directed me into the Sigma 120-300 model. I have always previously had telephoto WITHOUT image stabilizer and strongest aperture f4. I got tired of only getting 420mm (300mm + 1.4x) and has now decided to go up a step in the objective-class. Previously I used 300/4L USM and been satisfied.

In all cases.
I can buy a bag sacks. 120-300/2.8 APO EX DG HSM for 8000 - and beg. 120-300/2.8 APO EX DG HSM OS 16000: -. Both have 3-6 months warranty, anyway it with the OS. Now to my questions / concerns.

This lens I will probably NOT to hand hold as much as it weighs nearly 3kg, but will have it for the most part on a tripod / monopod.

1.Do need I OS?
I know it can be really nice with the OS then you can get a little better sharpness of images.

2.Was the first model (non OS) good with converters?
I've looked on the forums and stuff about this and it seems that the converter can handle good but I do not know completely

3.Can I trust the Digital Picture sites sharpness test on these two lenses?

4. Is there any possibility to fix the old 120-300 if something happens?

5. Since this lens will be used mostly on the stand, is there any idea to have the OS then?

6. For those 1300 USD I can buy a new tripod and wide angle lens

The camera I use is 70D, then crop-factor x1.6...

So :
120-300/2.8 EX APO HSM DG (1300 USD) vs 120-300/2.8 EX APO HSM DG OS (2600 USD)

The newer OS models are sharper than the old EX model. I did use an old non-OS model with converters and it quite simply was not good. I now have the newest S version in my hands but not had enough change to test with converters but there are many here who seem to be doing well with them.

I can honestly say it is not a heavy lens, but i handhold my 500 f4 IS. OS works quite well and the newer HSM is better than I remember the old model.

Go with one of the newer OS models as you don't know when you might want to take a shot without a tripod. Plus the new OS models have different (and sharper) optics plus faster focus when compared to the old EX model.

The old OS and new S OS supposedly have the same optics (depending on where you read a comparison). The new S OS is compatable with the USB dock (allows tuning of autofocus parameters although there is a rumour floating around the dock with a firmware change might be made to work with older Sigma lens), has a focus limiter and has better QC from all accounts (more consistently sharper right out of the box). However, the old OS model is much cheaper now on clearout and lighter making it borderline hand holdable for a while (although a few but not mine yet have had the OS crap out).

DDL wrote in post #16460442
Go with one of the newer OS models as you don't know when you might want to take a shot without a tripod. Plus the new OS models have different (and sharper) optics plus faster focus when compared to the old EX model.

The old OS and new S OS supposedly have the same optics (depending on where you read a comparison). The new S OS is compatable with the USB dock (allows tuning of autofocus parameters although there is a rumour floating around the dock with a firmware change might be made to work with older Sigma lens), has a focus limiter and has better QC from all accounts (more consistently sharper right out of the box). However, the old OS model is much cheaper now on clearout and lighter making it borderline hand holdable for a while (although a few but not mine yet have had the OS crap out).

Is the NON-OS a bad lens?

It's not a bad lens, but the OS model is better, and it works better with teleconverters.

If you don't use teleconverters and you know that you don't need OS, you may be better off with the non-OS for half the price but then of course you have to be comfortable with living with 300mm (which is actually less than 300 with near subjects.)

However, you mentioned wildlife shooting and that you had 420mm before, so the old non-OS Sigma won't cut it without teleconverters.

Check out my nature shots portfolio (down in my signature) to see hundreds of shots taken with the OS Sigma and teleconverters.

gabebalazs wrote in post #16460928
It's not a bad lens, but the OS model is better, and it works better with teleconverters.

If you don't use teleconverters and you know that you don't need OS, you may be better off with the non-OS for half the price but then of course you have to be comfortable with living with 300mm (which is actually less than 300 with near subjects.)

However, you mentioned wildlife shooting and that you had 420mm before, so the old non-OS Sigma won't cut it without teleconverters.

Check out my nature shots portfolio (down in my signature) to see hundreds of shots taken with the OS Sigma and teleconverters.

Man! I have written a message to you in flickr and asked about the 120-300 OS days ago hehe, these shots are fantastic! Is the lens so good?

notimetochill wrote in post #16461209
Man! I have written a message to you in flickr and asked about the 120-300 OS days ago hehe, these shots are fantastic! Is the lens so good?

You did??? Oh, I must have missed that, I'm sorry.

Yeah, just ask me anything you want to know about it

The lens is very very good, in fact its newer version (which is optically the same) was named best tele zoom on Canon cameras by DXO Labs (it's based on a composite score).

I use it on a tripod or monopod most of the time. But I do shoot birds in flight too with it, and shot air shows mostly hand held.

IQ with converters is good but requires a little more work both shooting technique and post processing with the 2x TC. Quality with the 1.4x is very nice, tack sharp at f/5.6 but very usable even wide open.

gabebalazs wrote in post #16461217
You did??? Oh, I must have missed that, I'm sorry.

Yeah, just ask me anything you want to know about it

The lens is very very good, in fact its newer version (which is optically the same) was named best tele zoom on Canon cameras by DXO Labs (it's based on a composite score).

I use it on a tripod or monopod most of the time. But I do shoot birds in flight too with it, and shot air shows mostly hand held.

IQ with converters is good but requires a little more work both shooting technique and post processing with the 2x TC. Quality with the 1.4x is very nice, tack sharp at f/5.6 but very usable even wide open.

If I use a tripod with 2x TC is it more work then?
How is the sharpness wide open 2.8 (120-300)?

Sharpness wide open without a TC is excellent, especially on a full frame camera.

Tripod and 2x TC is less work compared to hand held

gabebalazs wrote in post #16461337
Sharpness wide open without a TC is excellent, especially on a full frame camera.

Tripod and 2x TC is less work compared to hand held

Yeah it's hard to see which of all your photos that is taken with 2x tc on flickr ?
I got a 70D, what do you think about that combo?

Neilyb wrote in post #16460249
The newer OS models are sharper than the old EX model. I did use an old non-OS model with converters and it quite simply was not good. I now have the newest S version in my hands but not had enough change to test with converters but there are many here who seem to be doing well with them.

I can honestly say it is not a heavy lens, but i handhold my 500 f4 IS. OS works quite well and the newer HSM is better than I remember the old model.

Is this you?

notimetochill wrote in post #16461354
Yeah it's hard to see which of all your photos that is taken with 2x tc on flickr ?
I got a 70D, what do you think about that combo?

70D plus the Sigma is a great combo for wildlife. 70D's AF and frame rate is very good and so is the image quality (I prefer it to my 7D).

I wouldn't buy the non OS model. So choice is either OS model or the newer OS sports version.

For my new price 2500 USD I get a used 70-200/2.8 and a used 400/5.6L together. Hmm...?

I can get 2 lenses for that price and I always dreamed about 2 cqmeras. I don't know how to do?