Sigma 100-300/120-300 owners..

This zoom range has been tugging at me for a while now, so I've been reading and reading about these two lenses. What I've been wondering is how these lenses hold up over time/abuse/climate etc. For example, I've never really heard of a 70-200 or 100-400 owner complain of zoom ring/slide lock-ups or erratic behavior in temperature near freezing.

Can you folks who've had either lens for a good period of time hit the poll please?

Thanks

Edit - Thanks for the move.

"My lens has seen plenty of use under various conditions and still in great visible and functional shape."

I voted this one, but I should qualify it as my 120-300 has been used under various conditions, but those conditions are southern California conditions

That is, mostly sunny, yet some drizzle here and there.

I've used both the 100-300 and now the 120-300 and they are superb lenses, both build-wise and optically. But we've had this discussion before, right Brian?

[I'm sure some of our UK motorsports "120-300" posse will be around shortly to give their take on things...considering their foul weather.]

I haven't put my 100-300 through much abuse at all (I am very particular about the way I treat my equipment), but I would expect it to hold up nonetheless.

Although the glass at both ends is stationary and sealed, I think you would still have some amount of air movement through the zoom/focus rings (I can't say that this would not also happen on the Canon lenses). Not sure whether there'd be water vapour condensing inside under sub-zero conditions.

Considering Sigma rate their camera bodies down to zero degrees, I would expect their lenses to hold up to similar conditions.

LightRules wrote in post #4473345
[I'm sure some of our UK motorsports "120-300" posse will be around shortly to give their take on things...considering their foul weather.]

Yep, one here.
Mine has been covered in dust at rallies, been out in very cold conditions when my fingers stopped working, baked in the sun that day it shone a couple of years ago! Left in the grass while I shoot with my other lens/body, it's had so much water on the end it wouldn't focus properly and it's still fine

LightRules wrote in post #4473345
I've used both the 100-300 and now the 120-300 and they are superb lenses, both build-wise and optically. But we've had this discussion before, right Brian?

Yes Jojo, we've had You know I'm grateful for you sharing your experienced opinions with me

photobitz wrote in post #4473464
I haven't put my 100-300 through much abuse at all (I am very particular about the way I treat my equipment), but I would expect it to hold up nonetheless.

I am very particular as well, probably too much so although I've gotten much better

I can't quote this, but I have read about some people complaining about the finish wearing or flaking off, zoom rings binding either from usage over time or as an affect from semi-extreme temperatures. I am also concerned about resale value. My understanding as of now is that, for example, my 70-200 2.8IS will most likely hold it's value for years to come. This is a comfort, and I'm sure to most others as well. It would be great to know that that either of these two Sigma lenses will hold the same fate and for me this is somewhat of a factor in deciding whether or not to own one.

Also, for anyone about to tell me not to compare the 7-2xx xx with either said Sigma, I'm not. I understand they're all different beasts and best suited for different purposes. Just to reiterate, I'm question the long term durability of the two Sigma lenses at the top of this thread.

Unfortunately I think over time the rubberised finish will wear. As far as resale goes, the Sigmas do not seem to keep value as well as the Canons. On the plus side, if you can pick up a used one, you'll save a bunch.