Buying a Telephoto in Winter = Stupid

Why do I do this to myself? I needed to spend about $4000 of photo gear by then end of 2014 for tax purposes. I've always wanted a 300/2.8 for indoor sports and I love the idea of a 200-400/4 for outdoor sports.....and so the Sigma 120-300/2.8 has always interested me. I decided to get one.

Right off the bat, I tried to calbrate it with camera MA.....which worked in the near field but the lens was off at distance. I shot a basketball game and figured this out, so I ordered the Sigma dock. After a painful four hours setting up the microadjust using the Sigma dock with both of my bodies, I got it so it would focus accurately everywhere. But I was still itching......so many misses at that basketball game. But I didn't even buy the dang thing to shoot basketball, because I prefer a 70-200 for that. Was this a lens I could trust, or not?

I did some other controlled tests around the house, the lens seemed to be quite sharp, on par with my 70-200/2.8 IS II alone, and on par with my 100-400L with a 1.4X TC and wide open (one stop faster). But still......

So the kids wanted to go sledding today, and I took the opportunity to do some more fiddling with the lens. You get funny looks at a sledding hill carrying around a 120-300/2.8.

So now the focus is dead on. But the shots looked a little soft. This is where the title of this thread comes in......do not buy a telephoto lens you are worried about in winter. The light sucks, you don't want to be outside, everything is against you. Here's a couple shots.....the lens is actually fine but in this mushy light nothing looked super crisp. It took another session back home with flash and tripod to get comfortable again.

Why do I do this to myself?

JeffreyG wrote in post #17377772
Why do I do this to myself? I needed to spend about $4000 of photo gear by then end of 2014 for tax purposes.

I wish I have your kind of problem.

Seems a lot of effort needed just to get a lens focused properly though.

I keep telling myself this every time I read one of the 100-400L V2 threads. I've sold my old 100-400L, and am trying to be patient and accumulate additional funds. I do not need the lens for at least a couple of months, but it is so hard to be patient.

Scott M wrote in post #17377916
I keep telling myself this every time I read one of the 100-400L V2 threads. I've sold my old 100-400L, and am trying to be patient and accumulate additional funds. I do not need the lens for at least a couple of months, but it is so hard to be patient.

As soon as I heard the lens was being delivered, I sold my EF100-400 V1 and EF24-70 f2.8 V1, which just about covered the EF100-400 V2.

I've been floored by this lens so far, having been very familiar using the V1 since 1999 and taken over 250,000 shots with it.

Because of the time of year where there are more rebates due to the holidays and the fact I usually get gift cards to off set the cost of equipment I usually buy stuff around now. This has included 2 macro lenses, the 70-200/4 IS and now the Ioptron tracker this year. All of which I didn't really get much use out of until the following spring. I don't see myself getting much use out of the tracker till this spring either. It is what it is I guess.

Heya,

It's just relative.

Winter here in Florida, I'm birding with a long lens...

Very best,

Scott M wrote in post #17377916
I keep telling myself this every time I read one of the 100-400L V2 threads. I've sold my old 100-400L, and am trying to be patient and accumulate additional funds. I do not need the lens for at least a couple of months, but it is so hard to be patient.

I was at first tempted by the new 100-400L V2, which is in an ironic way what prompted me to give the Sigma a try.. But my 100-400L is just stellar.....I hear people complain about this lens sometimes and I figure I must simply have one of the best ones around. It's performance is really not a long throw from my 70-200/2.8 IS II.

Not that the better IS of the V2 didn't tempt me, and I suspect the V2 might be a bit better than even my very good V1.

But I thought I'd give the Sigma a try mainly for the speed. Before getting it my longest f/2.8 was 200mm, and I was at f/5.6 from 200-400. With the Sigma I have a 300/2.8 and a 170-420/4. I can use that.

MalVeauX wrote in post #17377935
Heya,

It's just relative.

Winter here in Florida, I'm birding with a long lens...

Very best,

Ha! True now, but we'll see who is laughing in August.

JeffreyG wrote in post #17377983
I was at first tempted by the new 100-400L V2, which is in an ironic way what prompted me to give the Sigma a try.. But my 100-400L is just stellar.....I hear people complain about this lens sometimes and I figure I must simply have one of the best ones around. It's performance is really not a long throw from my 70-200/2.8 IS II.

Not that the better IS of the V2 didn't tempt me, and I suspect the V2 might be a bit better than even my very good V1.

But I thought I'd give the Sigma a try mainly for the speed. Before getting it my longest f/2.8 was 200mm, and I was at f/5.6 from 200-400. With the Sigma I have a 300/2.8 and a 170-420/4. I can use that.

I had a very good copy of the 100-400L, too, but the old IS system was the one thing I really disliked about that lens. I use my 100-400L a lot, so I decided I would upgrade for the newer IS and improved IQ and AF performance (although I had no complaints about those latter two items with my old lens). That Sigma 120-300 is intriguing, but it's just too large for my needs, as are the Tamron and Sigma 150-600 lenses.

By the end of this month, I should have about $300 in Amazon gift cards and credit card points accumulated. The longer I wait, the more CC points I'll accumulate, so patience will be rewarded. I doubt I'll be able to use the lens until April anyway.

Haha... I just bought a 100-400 II, along with a 7D2. This weekend I got out and froze trying it out. I was thinking the same as you when I got home... why did I do this to myself? In my case, my daughter is playing next week in Florida in the flag football nationals (defending champs), so I had an "excuse" to buy some gear. So I'll "suffer" through it.

Heya,

Even in cold areas with snow, I would think there's wildlife to be sought out. With a mobile blind and winter gear, shouldn't be so bad, yes?

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #17378572
Heya,

Even in cold areas with snow, I would think there's wildlife to be sought out. With a mobile blind and winter gear, shouldn't be so bad, yes?

Very best,

I have to travel for most of my wildlife shooting, and we don't do that in the winter. About the only thing I use the 100-400L around home is for our zoo visits (we have a membership). I can get by with my 70-200 f/4 IS in a pinch if the weather breaks enough for us to visit before I buy the new version of the 100-400L.

ha...my biggest issue isn't the weather, it's the light...by the time i'm typically off work, there's about an hour left before sunset...hope the sigma 120-300mm works out for you...i recently felt mine was backfocusing a bit, but it was just on my 70D, and just at the long end...so i didn't have to put it on the dock...not going to lie, i really don't want to if i don't have to...seems like a big ordeal

JeffreyG wrote in post #17377772
Why do I do this to myself?

...well, somebody's gotta do it.

DreDaze wrote in post #17379140
ha...my biggest issue isn't the weather, it's the light...by the time i'm typically off work, there's about an hour left before sunset...

Lucky you. When I get off work, it is an hour after sunset!

I want to get the new 100-400, but I am waiting for warmer and longer days.