Some final MiLB action with my Canon

Enjoy

1.

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

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

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

Is this the Sigma 120-300mm?

I was contemplating this lens at one time...what are your opinions of this lens?

However I'm looking into the 300mm f/4L IS now...

Just curious?

BTW thanks for sharing your photos I enjoyed checking it out!

The sigma is a solid lens. It is soft at 2.8, but you will only notice that if you pixel peep.

At F4 it is extremely sharp.

If your looking to shoot night time or dark stuff you will need the 2.8 for sure.

The lens is solid, not awesome just solid. The flexibility of the zoom is a great feature.

Even with a 400 f/2.8, I dont shoot at 2.8 unless its pitch dark.
I think people get a little too obsessed with sharpness sometimes.
IMO, the downfall of the Sigma 120-300 is its slower focusing.

That being said, do you have anything other than pitchers and batters? Maybe the game was a no-hitter?

haven't processed them all and yeah it was actually quite boring. I think together they had only 14 hits

The Pitchers were on that night.

Take into account the 300 vs 400 when you're talking about shooting at f/2.8. With the 400 you're closer to the subject and can drop it to f/4 and be good to go. The 300 being farther away you may not be able to get the same results. I shoot almost primarily at 2.8 without the extender, and honestly so does every baseball shooter I know using the 300...400 on the other hand it ranges between 2.8-4, some say exclusively 2.8 while others say they go to 4. Of course it depends what you're shooting as most baseball shooters are focusing on individual players for stock purposes, a play at second where there's more than one person involved you'd want to get more in focus and change that up. If conditions allow though ya better be getting sharp images no matter what.

Biggest problems with the Sigma when I had it was the lack of sharpness at 2.8 and the slower focus.

MJPhotos24 wrote in post #6092602
Biggest problems with the Sigma when I had it was the lack of sharpness at 2.8 and the slower focus.

Totally agree on this Mike. I still have one but definitely want the 300 something bad. That said, I'll probably have the 120-300 in use tomorrow night for some soccer once the light starts to fail.

oh yeah, #2 kills it Matt, nice job on that one! that's some funkay lighting on the first one. at first it almost looked like a strobe test where only one fired.

you know I should have closed down the F stop so it was better then that to be honest.