Opinions on Canon 300 2.8 non IS - should I buy??

So, I may have found a great deal on a 300 2.8 non-IS (I may be able to get it for under $700 US).
I've heard great things about the lens and would be great for shooting my kids Vball and other sports and dogs.

Problem is it's over 5 hours away and I may be able to have my aunt, who knows nothing about lenses pick it up for me. I'm not familiar with the 300, but was hoping to get some advice on things to look for? It will be coming with a 7D camera - so she'll be able ot test out the autofocus, but any checklist I should give her, or for that price, just jump on it and take my chances?

Thanks!

It’s a very good lens indeed - I don’t have one but have seen results from a friend. However it is apparently hard to get parts for so getting it serviced or fixed in future may be an issue.

Thanks - yeah, that's what I'm finding. I know of a local shop who does fix em up apparently.
I may look at the non OS sigma 120-300 2.8 as well - heard great things about those lenses too...

I would try to find one with IS. I have an IS model (version 1) and can't imagine not having IS. The 300 weighs almost twice (5.6 pounds vs 3.2 pounds) what a 70-200 2.8LIS weighs so hand holding for any amount of time is difficult. But if you plan on tripod or monopod use most of the time then go for it. Great lens otherwise.

YES, YES, YES! I bought one 12 years ago and it's worked flawlessly 24/7 365 in all weathers. For seven hunered bucks its a steal as long as its functioning.
Throw a monopod under it and enjoy the ride.
It's the "five hours away" that's throwing me. Is that walking, cycling, driving or flying?? I always find this way of measuring distance odd as when im at the pumps it dispenses in gallons not hours

bildeb0rg wrote in post #18795966
YES, YES, YES! I bought one 12 years ago and it's worked flawlessly 24/7 365 in all weathers. For seven hunered bucks its a steal as long as its functioning.
Throw a monopod under it and enjoy the ride.
It's the "five hours away" that's throwing me. Is that walking, cycling, driving or flying?? I always find this way of measuring distance odd as when im at the pumps it dispenses in gallons not hours

LOL - 5 hours drive each way. I hesitated too long and missed out - shame as for an extra $400 he was including a 7D I with grip (would have been nice to have an extra body, 1.4x II T/C (already have one, but could have sold it and decreased price of lens even more!) and batteries, etc...
Now I know...
Thanks for the feedback!

LOL !! I worked with a few great guys from Poland a few years ago here in the Pittsburgh area. They could not understand why us Americans gave "time" amounts instead of "distance" numbers. I finally had them understanding our logic, but I don't think they were going to change the way they thought.....

Sooo, looks like the deal fell through and the 300 2.8 nonIS is still available. It's very tempting but I'm still worried about if/when it fails and not being able to fix it. but still considering it...

In the meantime, I've been eyeing a non-OS Sigma 120-300 2.8 as well. (The sport version is too much $$)

I know I want to stick with 2.8 as I shoot a lot of indoor volleyball, so I've passed on some great deals on a 300 F4L and 400 5.6L

I may try to hold out and see if I can find a Canon 300 2.8 IS version I.

Anyone have both the 300 L (any version) and the non-OS Sigma 120-300?

I’ve never used the non-IS, but my 300 2.8 IS (Ver I) is phenomenal. AF is blazing fast and it’s crazy sharp. It’s a little heavy, but I hand hold it for softball games/tournaments and it’s not too terrible. I can’t imagine using it without IS though even if it’s mostly psychological, lol. It also plays nicely with the 1.4x and 2x.

I did not know there were 2 versions of the Sigma 120-300mm, there is only 1 version listed on B&H.

I own the Canon 400mm F/5.6 & it is awesome. The only negative about it is the F/5.6. It's also 1/10th the cost.

I know of 3 people that own the Sigma 120-300mm F/2.8 & use them to shoot professional sports. Two of the guys absolutely love it. The 3rd loves the versatility of the zoom coupled with a constant F/2.8, but feels it's a bit soft. He "puts up" with it being soft because of how much easier that zoom range makes his job. Most guys carry 3 bodies: a wide angle on 1, the 70-200mm on a second, & a 400mm on the third. This allows him to leave the 70-200mm at home.

Love mine!

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1306955

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #16021071
Four sort of.

The Original one, (2006?) Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 AF APO EX HSM
The DG one, (2007ish?) Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 AF APO EX DG HSM
The first OS version, (2011) Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 AF APO EX DG OS HSM
now the latest Sport Version: (2013) 120-300mm F2.8 DG OS HSM | S

We understand, as DreDaze alludes to, that the "DG" was simply stamped on newer version of many SIGMA lenses when they changed the optical coatings optimized for use with digital sensors vs. the older Film recipe. So the first two are truly identical in all other aspects. This is true of the entire line of SIGMA lenses at that time, they simply felt the need to put more letters on their lenses as marketing hype and a form of self congratulations after finally coming to realize that they needed to update their lens coatings.

Thanks! Yeah, the 120-300 line up gets kinda confusing.
I saw an original version in great condition for sale - if I can pick it up for a reasonably low price, I may try it out.
If I don't like it, I can sell it and wait to get a IS 300 2.8

Thanks for the info. Sigma usually has designations in the title of lens such as "art", "contemporary", or "sports". That is why I wasn't aware of different versions.

https://www.bhphotovid​eo.com …_2_8_DG_OS.html​?sts=pi-ps


It mentions "Sports Line" in the description below, just not in the title.