Looking for a Long Lens

05Xrunner wrote in post #17717460
I will bet most of these people saying the sigma will have problems are canon fanboys. I never owned the 120-300 but always read it was a fantastic lens. I used to own the 100-400v1 and sold it few years back. Got a sigma 150-600C in the spring and it is my favorite lens. Most of the people who put down the sigma lens are fanboys and never even used one before to make any real judgement. My vote would be the 120-300 or the 150-600. If budget tight get the 150-600C. It's IQ is pretty much equal according to sigma. Mine is very sharp wide open. It just isn't built as tough for nasty weather.

I am often partial to Canon lenses based solely on my (somewhat limited) experience with non-Canon lenses.

That being said, if I were looking for a lens to purchase (not rent) longer than 200mm, I'd pick the Tamron 150-600 VC. I rented it a year or so ago for a golf tournament and I was very pleased - right up to and including 600mm. Of course, it was a bright sunny day and I could bump the shutter speed and stop down etc. as needed. But I was delighted with the images and I really loved the lens.

05Xrunner wrote in post #17717460
I will bet most of these people saying the sigma will have problems are canon fanboys. I never owned the 120-300 but always read it was a fantastic lens. I used to own the 100-400v1 and sold it few years back. Got a sigma 150-600C in the spring and it is my favorite lens. Most of the people who put down the sigma lens are fanboys and never even used one before to make any real judgement. My vote would be the 120-300 or the 150-600. If budget tight get the 150-600C. It's IQ is pretty much equal according to sigma. Mine is very sharp wide open. It just isn't built as tough for nasty weather.

I have used a number of third party lenses and not had any AF "Problems", well there was an old Sigma 50mm Macro that wouldn't AF but then it was a film era lens.
Whilst the AF on the more recent Sigma and Tamron lenses that I have used has worked and been accurate it has been slower than on the Canon equivalents and does not track quite as well. For many this is of little or no relevance - for me it's very important.
I have only had the briefest of trials with the Sigma 120-300 F2.8 (S) and it is a fine lens but a bit sluggish compared to my Canon 300 F2.8 L IS Mk1 but then many Canon lenses are slow compared to this lens! More recently I managed to have a play with the Sigma 150-600 (S) and, potentially, it is looking very promising - see my previous posts. I didn't get the opportunity to try it on moving subjects but I got the impression that it may not be that quick - NOTE that was my impression and not a proven/tested opinion. What I really liked about this lens was the fact that it is a high quality product at a very reasonable price.
If budget is an issue (isn't it for most of us?) then the Sigma/Tamron lenses look VERY good, if the ultimate is required then Canon will, normally, be better but at quite a price!

Have you considered the Canon 400 F 5.6?

I found a great deal on the 120-300 OS Non Sport model that comes in tomorrow that I will be testing so hopefully it works out till I can get a big white for my work...or who knows may just stick with Sigma.

Enjoy. I love mine.

I am sure you will be pleased. One day I will get myself a 120-300.

Does anyone know if the OS Model I got, the non Sport will take a Canon 1.4 tele?

RussellJ wrote in post #17718932
Does anyone know if the OS Model I got, the non Sport will take a Canon 1.4 tele?

Yes it should work fine

some have found that the Sigma tc's tend to work just a tiny bit better than any others, particularly when you get to 2.0x. I know they work well for me

RussellJ wrote in post #17718360
I found a great deal on the 120-300 OS Non Sport model that comes in tomorrow that I will be testing so hopefully it works out till I can get a big white for my work...or who knows may just stick with Sigma.

I own this and many more have. Gabezalas has won many many many awards with his 120-300 OS non sport model on a 7D and 70D. I picked up my 120-300 2.8 OS non sport for 1675 about two years ago I think and it's been one hell of a performing lens.

Main thing to watch out for is do not remove the lens with the camera on.... turn the camera off and wait a couple of seconds. OS issues could be caused from doing so with the camera on. Other then that it's been great.

I had the Canon 300mm 2.8 IS V1 lens a UZ copy mint and had it first and then I landed the deal on the 120-300. When using lightroom the Sigma just needs a slight adjustment to match the Canon 300 IS V1. From a non adjusted canon photo to a sigma photo the sigma needed a -5 on black, a +5 on contrast and a +35 setting on sharpening (remember the canon would be at the lightroom default setting is +25)

The AF is not as instantaneous as the Canon but the lens holds it's own and is really not noticable unless you try to AF from one end to the other. But for football, motocross, birds in flight... it can handle all of it.

Talley wrote in post #17719282
Main thing to watch out for is do not remove the lens with the camera on.... turn the camera off and wait a couple of seconds. OS issues could be caused from doing so with the camera on. Other then that it's been great.

i've never heard/done that with any of my OS lenses...do you have any links that say it contributes to OS failures?

DreDaze wrote in post #17719300
i've never heard/done that with any of my OS lenses...do you have any links that say it contributes to OS failures?

after 3 OS failures on my 70-200 2.8 OS and two in my buddies 120-300 2.8 OS non sport yes... Sigma told me to turn the camera off first.

Isn't it simpler just to turn the IS/OS/VR off and just turn it on when needed?
With the stabiliser off your AF will be faster and your lens will track better = better images. Naturally in emergencies you can turn the IS/VR/OS back on for fairly static subjects in low light.
Having said that I haven't used my IS on any of my Canon IS lenses for 1 week short of 21 months - loving the higher keeper rate though!
Though I wonder if my IS systems still work?

johnf3f wrote in post #17719381
Isn't it simpler just to turn the IS/OS/VR off and just turn it on when needed?
With the stabiliser off your AF will be faster and your lens will track better = better images. Naturally in emergencies you can turn the IS/VR/OS back on for fairly static subjects in low light.
Having said that I haven't used my IS on any of my Canon IS lenses for 1 week short of 21 months - loving the higher keeper rate though!
Though I wonder if my IS systems still work?

Canon recommends using ISeven for sports or other high shutter situations as it helps stabilize the image so the AF can lock on easier

05Xrunner wrote in post #17717460
I will bet most of these people saying the sigma will have problems are canon fanboys. I never owned the 120-300 but always read it was a fantastic lens. I used to own the 100-400v1 and sold it few years back. Got a sigma 150-600C in the spring and it is my favorite lens. Most of the people who put down the sigma lens are fanboys and never even used one before to make any real judgement. My vote would be the 120-300 or the 150-600. If budget tight get the 150-600C. It's IQ is pretty much equal according to sigma. Mine is very sharp wide open. It just isn't built as tough for nasty weather.

Just curious as to where you got your canon fanboy statistics.