Sigma 120-300 - Not Happy :(

I have been using the 120-300 for some time now.. i didn't expect great results first time out hence it's been a while.. but really I should be getting better than I am.. every shot looks like crap

I went to womens football on sunday.. Then I put the 120-300 on the 10D and get this

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

I purchased a 120-300 for sports shooting. I used it on both a 20D and the 1D MkIIn. On both cameras the lens would not focus fast enough to shoot a moving target. At times it would not focus at all on a non moving target. I purchased it used and the seller was good enough to take it back. It was junk. I have since bought a new Canon 300 2.8 and it is awesome. I have not had any problems with this lens on either camera. I am not going to get into all of the different settings I tried on the Sigma but I tried everything to get it to work because I really wanted a f/2.8 300 zoom but in the end I could not get it to do what I needed (Focus). It was the DG version. I learned my lesson from now on its Canon and its new. I wound up loosing about $200.00 on this trial and some work.

hmmm - given i've seen people tracking diving Osprey and motorcycles, i'd certainly think it focuses pretty fast.

i won't know until tomorrow night's game but in tests over the weekend it seems to focus faster than my bigma.

blackviolet wrote in post #2038259
i won't know until tomorrow night's game but in tests over the weekend it seems to focus faster than my bigma.

On a 1dMK2 it will focus faster than a very fast focussing thing that's just won the fastest focussing thing in the world contest

I got a chance for a quick try of my 120-300 & 2x TC on an original 1D and a MK2 at the weekend. Quite impressive given that it performs rather well on my lowly 20D

Why are Sigma's prone to body/lens combo calibrations? Why isn't this the case with Canon lenses? That would piss me off if I had to send in my camera body to them.

I too owned this lens and had a thoughly bad time with it. After all the the good reviews I've seen I thought I was the one on the planet who was disatisfied.

Sold it and bought a canon 300mm f2.8 LIS - all is good now.

I did try this lens and found it very good,But opted for the canon 300L for the weather sealing and is and AF stop and preset.

foghorn wrote in post #2039547
Why are Sigma's prone to body/lens combo calibrations? Why isn't this the case with Canon lenses? That would piss me off if I had to send in my camera body to them.

Canon has problems too. The 24-105 and 70-300 were completely recalled. The 24-70L has been well documented as having huge copy to copy variations (some people would order 2 or 3 of them and pick the best one, *cough* Dante).

Im pretty sure the sigma 120-300 has issues. I got the Dg version. The first one was terrible, the second was okish but total rubbish at 2.8
I swithered for a long time whether to bother trying a third time but there are good copies out there....Apparently.
I sent my second one off to Sigma with my newly checked 20D for calibration as stated above it came back okish but at 2.8 where i use it a lot it was total pants.
Third time lucky i hope. Its a great focal lengh for football hence my desire to get a good one.
I have had the other issues stated here as well, push for focus and nothing happens, if another object comes anywhere near the centre focus point it gets confused.
Best of luck finding a good copy but in my opinion Sigma need to get their act together on a lens of this price.

Mark

County Man wrote in post #2045684
...but at 2.8 where i use it a lot it was total pants.

Mark

LOL Off the topic, but I just love this expression. Haven't heard it for years. It's not something we say in kiwiland really.