Canon 300 f2.8 L IS USM v. Sigma 300 f2.8 EX DG HSM

I've posted a test comparison of these two 300 f2.8 primes at my site http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/300speed

Just sharing the love with the delightful POTN crowd

Feel free to leave comments here or at my site directly.

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

Oh yeah baby ... have been considering either the Sigma or Nikon 300mm 2.8 VR. Good timing

The results are just what I would expect from the canon,
Have you tested the 300EX against the 120-300?

LightRules always comes through. We just kinda expect that I guess. I had a Canon EF 300/4 L IS which I sold when I Got the EF 300/2.8 L IS. Emergency came up and I had to sell that. I hear good things about the Sigma and Tokina versions. I now have a Tamron SP LD IF 300/2.8 AF model. It is wonderful - especially for the price. Even takes TCs well - ok, not as good as the EF but nothing can beat that.

Thanks for the comparison . I've been thinking of the 300mm L , instead of the 400mm 5.6L.

condyk wrote in post #6870564
Oh yeah baby ... have been considering either the Sigma or Nikon 300mm 2.8 VR. Good timing

Dave, I've heard good things about the 300 f2.8 VR. I doubt the Sig can match it wide open, at least if it's anything like the L IS. But the Sig is a strong performer, just not as strong as the OEM here.

malla1962 wrote in post #6871182
The results are just what I would expect from the canon,
Have you tested the 300EX against the 120-300?

No, but I have plenty of crops on file between them (not direct comparisons) and my impression is that they are close without TCs. With TCs, I think the prime is better, and regarding AF, I think the prime is quite a bit better (both faster and more accurate). But that's simply the copies I've used (both "DG" versions).

gasrocks wrote in post #6871189
LightRules always comes through. We just kinda expect that I guess. I had a Canon EF 300/4 L IS which I sold when I Got the EF 300/2.8 L IS. Emergency came up and I had to sell that. I hear good things about the Sigma and Tokina versions. I now have a Tamron SP LD IF 300/2.8 AF model. It is wonderful - especially for the price. Even takes TCs well - ok, not as good as the EF but nothing can beat that.

Gene, how is the Tamron 300 f2.8? I assume the AF is somewhat slow? Accuracy? At least compared to ring - sonic units.

CountryBoy wrote in post #6871209
Thanks for the comparison . I've been thinking of the 300mm L , instead of the 400mm 5.6L.

CB, 300 f2.8 or 300 f4? I have both currently and am going to add the 300 f4 IS and 7-2 f2.8 IS compared to the Sigma 300 f2.8 shortly. I'm looking at the pics once I finish typing this sentence...

LightRules wrote in post #6872035
CB, 300 f2.8 or 300 f4? I have both currently and am going to add the 300 f4 IS and 7-2 f2.8 IS compared to the Sigma 300 f2.8 shortly. I'm looking at the pics once I finish typing this sentence...

Thanks for the test. I look forward to addition of the 300/4IS. Will it be compared against the 300/2.8IS too? I plan to get the latter one day but it would be great to see that it is $2.5K better than the 4!

LightRules wrote in post #6872035
CB, 300 f2.8 or 300 f4? I have both currently and am going to add the 300 f4 IS and 7-2 f2.8 IS compared to the Sigma 300 f2.8 shortly. I'm looking at the pics once I finish typing this sentence...

LightRules - The 300mm 2.8L IS. My thoughts are I could use it for sports and also a birding/wildlife lens. It seems to handle a 1.4 and 2x converter very well.

More then likely the next lens I buy will be my last, so I must be careful which one I choose.

KPBara wrote in post #6872421
Thanks for the test. I look forward to addition of the 300/4IS. Will it be compared against the 300/2.8IS too? I plan to get the latter one day but it would be great to see that it is $2.5K better than the 4!

I am planning to do some comparisons between the f2.8 and f4 siblings. But here's Bryan's findings on your question: http://the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=2

The "little brother" looks pretty darn good, I'd say.

CountryBoy wrote in post #6872430
LightRules - The 300mm 2.8L IS. My thoughts are I could use it for sports and also a birding/wildlife lens. It seems to handle a 1.4 and 2x converter very well.

More then likely the next lens I buy will be my last, so I must be careful which one I choose.

You will never regret getting the 300 f2.8 IS, CB. It's truly a special optic.

You will regret getting the 300 instead of the 400 though?

LightRules, thank you SO much for your informative lens tests. Real usage tests are the final word in lens comparisons and that's what you bring us.

Quick question though if you don't mind, what TCs were used in this shot? That performance is just outta this world.
http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/image/106979​264

condyk wrote in post #6870564
Oh yeah baby ... have been considering either the Sigma or Nikon 300mm 2.8 VR. Good timing

Dave, i had the 300 VR for about 2 days and i can tell you that it is as good as the 300 IS L. it truly is an amazing lens. i did get rid of it because i found a 200-400 VR which was the original plan

TeeTee wrote in post #6873059
LightRules, thank you SO much for your informative lens tests. Real usage tests are the final word in lens comparisons and that's what you bring us.

Quick question though if you don't mind, what TCs were used in this shot? That performance is just outta this world.
http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/image/106979​264

TT, yes this capture "shocked" me the very first time I saw it during initial review of all the test shots. I looked at it, did a double take, glanced at the EXIF and my test chart (what I use during testing to keep track of lenses, focal lengths, apertures, etc.), looked at it again at 100%, and just called it a day Seriously, I've viewed a million crops over the years and this was nothing short of superlative.

The 3 TCs were: Kenko Pro 1.4x non-DG, Kenko Pro 1.4x DG, Kenko Pro 1.4x DG. Effective focal length of 900mm wide open at f8; field of view of 1440mm (40D body).

condyk wrote in post #6870564
Oh yeah baby ... have been considering either the Sigma or Nikon 300mm 2.8 VR. Good timing

There is a Nikon for sale on TP forum.

LightRules wrote in post #6872035
Dave, I've heard good things about the 300 f2.8 VR. I doubt the Sig can match it wide open, at least if it's anything like the L IS. But the Sig is a strong performer, just not as strong as the OEM here.

I am mainly interested in the f8 performance with a 2x TCon but I think VR/IS would be the clincher for me because on safari you sometimes need to swing your stuff around off the beanbag and in the moment it can help get the shot ... of course, with these big boy lenses there is always the danger you also smash yer buddy in the face with it as you try and shoot out the opposite window

blonde wrote in post #6873275
Dave, i had the 300 VR for about 2 days and i can tell you that it is as good as the 300 IS L. it truly is an amazing lens. i did get rid of it because i found a 200-400 VR which was the original plan

Yeah, that zoomster is amazing, but a bit big for me I reckon unless I get a pack Donkey to haul it around I'll do a search and see what kinda shots you're getting with it. I guess you are on a D3 or D300 now?

malla1962 wrote in post #6874555
There is a Nikon for sale on TP forum.

I'm thinking I'll hire a big lens this year as I just don't have the shooting time any more to justify owning such a pricey item. Have already been in communication with Stewart at 'lenses for hire' re. a month in August ... but if the right lens comes up at the right price I could just change my mind. That example at TP is a decent price but I won't buy that one ... thanks for pointing it out tho'.

I was really happy with the performance of the 1D Mk II N, 400mm L and 1.4x last year ... Nikon really need to up their game on the slower, longer stuff. The 2.8 VR lenses are awesome but man you get spanked hard in the wallet area if you go that route!