Sigma AF 4.0 100-300mm EX - Experiences/opinions wanted

Hi all,

I've heard a lot of praise for the Sigma EX 120-300 /2.8 on this forum and assume that it's really a great lens (... for a price).

Now I've stumbled across the Sigma EX 100-300 /4 at eBay and tried to get some information on this lens (never heard about it on the forum so far).

I was somehow surprised to find out that it was ranked even better than the 120-300/2.8 and the Canon EF 5.6 100-300mm L on http://www.photozone.d​e/ . Hell, for what these lens tests are worth, it was even in the range of the Canon EF 4.0 300mm USM L IS prime!

Has anyone used that lens? Like the Canon 70-200/4 is supposed to be 'as great in image quality as the 70-200/2.8' and a real bargain, that Sigma lens would certainly be very interesting, if the relationship was similar.

Actually, it would even be more interesting, as the additional 100 mm on the long end and the possibility to use the 1.4 T-con might bring that lens up to 420/5.6 ... very useful indeed.

I also saw that one on ebay was being offered for about 400$ with the auction about to end in 15 minutes and got VERY excited ... but then I read that it was the SIGMA version. The prices for the Canon versions were more like 900$ ... too bad!

So - has anyone used that lens yet?

How does it compare to the other lenses in its range and the Sigma 50-500? I think that if the lens is good, it would certainly be interesting for more people...

Best regards,
Andy

Andy,

This is most likely the telezoom lens I will purchase, now that the Canon 70-300 DO IS seems to be a big disappointment. The Sigma seems outstanding in every respect, albeit a stop slower than the 120-300 f/2.8. The Sigma 80-400 OS and the Canon 100-400 IS remain alternatives in the anti-shake camp, and obviously in a higher price category.

Shop around and you'll find the 100-300 closer to US$800. Delta International is a good place to try. Pity that this lens costs so much more in Canon mount than any other ...

I've seen some amazingly crisp shots with this lens. Some have said that you need to stop down a bit for sharper images in the 250mm-300mm range, but otherwise it is very sharp between 100 and 250mm even at f/4. Not sure if the TC would affect sharpness.

The only complaints I've heard are that it's very big and heavy, and that 82mm filters are darned expensive. (I already have a B+W 82mm cir-pol bought used at a good price, so that's not a problem for me.) And you will most likely need a tripod or at least a monopod.

Cheers,

P.S. Aside from the infrequent quality control issues that have been raised on a few web forums, this Pop Photo review is about the most negative one I've yet seen:

http://www.popphoto.co​m …ction_id=2&arti​cle_id=291

See the 2nd page, where they discuss sharpness at 300mm while at the minimum focusing distance. They do call it a "slight weakness."

Hi Slejammer,

thanks for the link to the review.

For a 'negative review', that review sure is very good.

I really wonder why I haven't read more about this lens on the forum here!

Best regards,
Andy

The Sigma 100-300mm f/4 is a real quality peice of glass.

It is newer than the 70-200mm f/2.8 EX and some claim better image quality come with it. It' HSM motor is newer and definately is faster.

It simply blows away ANY 300mm zoom made by ANY manufacturer (excepet of course for the 120-300mm f/2.8 Sigma) but yes.. some feel the f/4 yeilds sharper images than the 120-300mm!

With these two lenses Sigma completely Dominates the 300mm zoom range.

I haven't heard of the DG version of this 100-300mm f4. What a pity. As many people say, this lens has no competitors in this focal range.

i was almost goin to buy this lens. i cam so close as to the point of with getting all funds into the right account. but after seeing multiply shots by the lens where the quality was really poor and didnt nearly reach the expectations i had from reading reviews from the lens i didnt end up getting it. beacuse i was going to buy the lens from the states as it it much cheaper to pay for shipping and taxes etc. then buying locally i wasnt game to risk getting a bad copy of this lens and having the hassesls of trying to exchange it. i have now opted to go for the canon 300mm f4 with the 1.4x TC and 70-200mm f4/ sigma 70-200mm f2.8 (havent decide which one to go here.)
but if you are able to get hold of a good copy locally for a decent price i bieleve you will be exstatic with the quality for the price.

I peronally know four people who own this lens, all members of this forum. The optics are superb in all cases and it focuses quickly and accurately. I've used their copies on my cameras and the results are excellent. Very nice lens. It's not quite up to the standards of the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX, the optics on the 120-300mm are better and it focuses faster. The 100-300 will certainly give the Canon 100-400L a run for it's money though.

I must have praised this lens about once or twice or three times a week minimum in threads about longer zoom options

I can only agree with the positive statements expressed above. I have never seen a single owner criticise it. It is a better lens all round than the 70-200 f4 (both have minor pro's and con's) unless you want light weight ... and it is a rival to the 100-400 IS L optically, a lens which I also owned. I sold mine to EOSAddict who is also very happy with it. I only upgraded to get IS. The HSM is really superb. I acvcepts the Sigma 1.4x as if it was made for it. The loss in quality is minimal to my eye. I kept the TCon on 95% of the time and I am fussy. AF speed remains super fast.

I saw from Sigma America's description on this 100-300mm f4, saying that "the new lens coating reduces ghosts and flare". Is it the coating of DG lenses? Just want to know if it will offer a newer DG version...

It seems to me that an important consideration is the choice between aperture and focal length. Both are important to good pics. It's 70-200 f2.8 against 100-300 f4. If I choose Sigma, I'd be inclined to 100-300 because of its even better comments. The money saved can be used to buy Canon 135mm f2 later. As I'll use it for sports pics, sometimes indoors, sharpness and response at wide open aperture is important. I think this lens already performs very well. I should have a try in a local shop soon. Does adding a 1.4x TC decrease the focusing speed noticeably?

I read a report from Outdoor Photography that this lens had very good ratings in performance and design. A minor weakness was sharpness at 300mm at the mimimum focusing distance. The other aspects were excellent or very good.

condyk wrote:
I must have praised this lens about once or twice or three times a week minimum in threads about longer zoom options

I can only agree with the positive statements expressed above. I have never seen a single owner criticise it. It is a better lens all round than the 70-200 f4 (both have minor pro's and con's) unless you want light weight ... and it is a rival to the 100-400 IS L optically, a lens which I also owned. I sold mine to EOSAddict who is also very happy with it. I only upgraded to get IS. The HSM is really superb. I acvcepts the Sigma 1.4x as if it was made for it. The loss in quality is minimal to my eye. I kept the TCon on 95% of the time and I am fussy. AF speed remains super fast.

Yep - I am delighted with it - its big and heavy but it handles superbly and is fantastic optically. I have never owned an L lens so have nothing to compare against but the zoom is smooth, the focus quiet and quick and the build quality rugged and high quality.

Heres a 100% crop example with the 1.4 TC also sold to me by condyk

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=100413

EOSAddict wrote:
Yep - I am delighted with it - its big and heavy but it handles superbly and is fantastic optically. I have never owned an L lens so have nothing to compare against but the zoom is smooth, the focus quiet and quick and the build quality rugged and high quality.

Heres a 100% crop example with the 1.4 TC also sold to me by condyk

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=100413

What a cool shot! You must have been very happy with this big toy!

Some people compare this lens with the 120-300mm f2.8, saying it performs not as good as that huge beast. I don't know, and various reports have so different comments, but it's convincing that the 100-300mm f4 is among the top notches of Sigma. The only concern to me is the aperture. A friend in this forum said that f4 is far not enough. ISO 800 is a must, and sometimes 1600 or 3200 is needed. I don't shoot car racings or speed ice skating in the dark, so I wonder if f4 is enough (maybe marginally) to freeze motions in gymnasiums, mainly are for ballgames, athletics, etc. I'm afraid nobody can answer this question because shooting conditions vary.

#Havew only had the les a few weeks an have only shot in daylight but have never had to resort to anything above ISO 400 - but then again I have managed to hand hold (with bracing) down to 1/125

Hi,

I've not had this lens long either and I'am still learning with it but so far on my 350D its been better than I thought, the focus is quick, its not too heavy to carry around all day and it gives good results. I can't ask for any more just now. Just one other thing I recently got a Kenko 1.4x for it and have been quite surprised by the results.

Here's couple of examples with the 1.4x fitted...

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

Haha,

well, there are more possible reasons for crappy photos than just bad equipment

Funny to see one of my old threads revived ... I got a used 80-200/2.8L in the meantime, mainly for the low-light ability.
I am currently looking for a 1.4x t-con (the Tamron or Kenko, as the Canon and Sigma don't fit) to get to 300/4.0 as well, because a second big lens would be really very difficult to explain to my loving wife (after she accepted the 80-200)

Best regards,
Andy