Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 users

CDS thanks, I had the 50-500mm and loved the ability to stand on one side of the soccer field and shoot all the way to the other side. Like I stated in other discussions, I must have gotten a bad lense cause the majority of my shots where HORRIBLE. The reason I asked about the 70-200 f2.8 is to see if it would be good to get for my Soccer Sports shots. I figure use it, move around (hand holding it) and get a 2x converter for those times that I can not move to the opposing side to take pictures. Are the pictures nice and sharp on the 70-200? will it loose something when I attach a 2x? I want to get the 120-300, someday, but I have a few soccer tournaments comming up and the money for the 70-200 is burning a whole in my pocket. Help

Morenoar, I just got done today shooting my daughters soccer game. I stared out with the 70-200 ex and a 1.4 and was able to get some great shots. But what I found is that I was missing some nice close shots. I took off the 1.4 and just used the 70-200.

I looked long and hard at the 120-300 and almost clicked the "buy it now" button on ebay a few times ( oh those shinny objects). I finally just thought I would get the 70-200 for 550.00, and I bought a 1.4 and 2x TC for 225 for the pair and still be under half.

I have not been home yet to download the pictures from the game, but I don't regret it yet. What also sold me was what CDS was saying about weight. I did not know how big that "canon" was until I saw it in person. That thing is HUGE.

I have to say, I live near Tenby, know the area very well. and without being unkind, the quality of the shot didn't impress me at all. I'm a rank amateur myself, and wouldn't think of paying that sort of money for a lens, but if I did, I'd be hoping for better than that.

I like the Sigma 70-200m a lot.
I ahven't even figured out if I am going to seel it or the Canon (I now have both,. long story) as I still like the Sigma soo much.

My review of it can be found here;
http://www.fredmiranda​.com …owproduct.php?p​roduct=102

And here is a comparison I did with the Canon;

http://www.fredmiranda​.com …oduct=12&sort=7​&thecat=27

First of all, those in Tenby were the first ever taken with that lens. 2nd I had never used a pro lens before. Second, they are jpegs and jpegs are crap a lot of the times compared to the original! This is definitley the case. If I need anymore clarification, look at the moon pic. Now that was wicked and if you want to be blown away, I have pics that prove this lens is the stuff dreams are made of! That said, my photog ability continues to grow with the lenses I have which include that one and a Canon L glass lens. I can tell you the original is much sharper.

I am SO HAPPY about news I just found out. I can go and RENT the 120-300 lens from one of our vendors here at work. YEAH baby, I just have to drive 70 miles to get it, and wait 2.5 weeks (trip to Tokyo) and then I can test it. OH YEAH BABY. Maybe I will rent the 100-400L also and compare. Would do you guys, that own one or the other or both lenses, think.

I can't WAIT

morenoar wrote:

I am SO HAPPY about news I just found out. I can go and RENT the 120-300 lens from one of our vendors here at work. YEAH baby, I just have to drive 70 miles to get it, and wait 2.5 weeks (trip to Tokyo) and then I can test it. OH YEAH BABY. Maybe I will rent the 100-400L also and compare. Would do you guys, that own one or the other or both lenses, think.

I can't WAIT

Cool! I think you should try both as it would be interesting to compare them side by side. Definitely go with the 120-300 Sigma one, then try the Canon one another day. Just bear in mind the Canon one is much slower, F4.5-5.6 vs F2.8 all the way, if that matters to you. I don't think you will run into the same problem as I would here in that the light is ever changing. It seem to me that where you are it is more or less the same for the most part day in, day out. Here in England, it can change drastically from one extreme to the other. I'd like to see what you can get with it. Try taking some pics of the moon in RAW. It will blow you away. The one I took on the page I am setting up in astrophotography gallery was a 100% crop from a large, fine jpeg pic!