Sigma 120-300 sport

Looking for real world reviews and pics using the sigma 120-300 2.8 sport

Sample thread;
https://photography-on-the.net …hread.php?t=934​592&page=1

Sadly no reviews in the review section;
https://photography-on-the.net …facturer=0&gear​id=0&f=137

But you'll get a lot of info and opinions in the sample thread.
FYI, the Sport and the original OS supposedly have the exact same optics, so the thread covers both.

The "Sport" arrives later in the thread discussion of the actual lens (vs. rumors) starts here;
https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=15939836

Fist images from members here;
https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=15960718

but those images are missing.

Optics are unchanged from the non sport OS model like what I own and the sport model. However build quality and other misc things necessary to keep optics aligned better could of been improved with the sport lens. I just sent my 120-300 2.8 OS out for repair since the OS unit was making noise and they replaced the front barrel due to shipping damage and I swear this thing is much sharper than before.

Looking to take the 120-300 out for a test drive this weekend since I got it back from repairs.

I've got lots of pics with it...most are using a 2X though...what questions do you have on it?

Just overall likes and dislikes. Af performance is probably my biggest concern. I'm sure IQ is super but some examples never hurt. I'm looking for glass to use for sport's soccer and hockey. Low light stuff.

Anyone know how this lens would compare to the Canon 300mm 2.8 is version 1?

Does anyone know if the Canon mirrorless bodies will shoot in H+ with this lens?

AntonLargiader wrote in post #19467779
Does anyone know if the Canon mirrorless bodies will shoot in H+ with this lens?

I use the 'sports' version of this lens on either my R5 or R6 and depending on battery level I get the green H+ icon, which means it should be able to get the maximum. I'm happy with the frame rate I get for rugby matches, but never tried to exactly find out how many pics it takes within the second.

I use mechanical shutter usually, so that's what my answer relates to. Electronic shutter does provide max FPS as well as far as I remember. (I just do not use it much, because mechanical shutter does not give rolling shutter effects, I kind of like to get a click when I take a photo over the silent mode and the FPS is plenty for my needs so don't want to go to 20 FPS for regular shooting).

I only have an R5 and R6, so can't say how it would be on other R cameras.

Thanks! I have the impression that the list of lenses supporting H+ is the same for all bodies.

https://cam.start.cano​n/en/H001/supplement_0​080.html

I've been lusting for an EF300/2.8 for a while and was about to jump on a recent one in the For Sale section, but it was an IS i whereas I would need an IS ii for H+ and those are substantially more expensive. The 120-300 is priced between them and I have to admit I am a zoom guy.

I do use H+ (both ES and MS) and especially in MS dropping out of H+ brings about a very noticeable reduction in frame rate. For the R7:

ES: 30 drops to 15
EFC: 15 drops to 8
MS: 15 drops to 7

Those are best case scenarios from the manual and I think actual speeds tend to be slower.

AntonLargiader wrote in post #19467955
Thanks! I have the impression that the list of lenses supporting H+ is the same for all bodies.

https://cam.start.cano​n/en/H001/supplement_0​080.html

I've been lusting for an EF300/2.8 for a while and was about to jump on a recent one in the For Sale section, but it was an IS i whereas I would need an IS ii for H+ and those are substantially more expensive. The 120-300 is priced between them and I have to admit I am a zoom guy.

I do use H+ (both ES and MS) and especially in MS dropping out of H+ brings about a very noticeable reduction in frame rate. For the R7:

ES: 30 drops to 15
EFC: 15 drops to 8
MS: 15 drops to 7

Those are best case scenarios from the manual and I think actual speeds tend to be slower.

I got this lens when I was shooting DSLR and keep using it on mirrorless. The Canon white primes were far too expensive for me, and still are. Now that I'm using the 120-300 for quite some time I actually thing that the zoom with the far wider 120 mm is very useful, so don't see the added value for the primes as I'm satisfied with the image quality I get.
I only shoot amateur matches and can sit directly behind the try-area so the 120 is very useful if a try is scored nearby. (When the weather is not too bad, I tend to keep a second camera with a 70-200 or sometimes 24-70 nearby as 120 is still quite tele for the close by action.