Sigma 300 2.8 vs Canon 300 2.8 vs 120-300 2.8?

Right guys. I have read a reviews, even a comparison somewhere on here, but still I have reservations. MPB have a minty Sigma 300 2.8 for just over a grand...but it is not the fabled Canon, does not have IS...

How does it perform with TC's? Would it be sharper than the 120-300 2.8 (especially with TC'S?)....how fast is the focussing...fast enough for BIFs?

Is this the non-HSM AF one, or the new one?

1) Very well
2) Possibly equal, 120-300 has ERR99 issues reported but not sure if these are fixed.
3) Should be great, but you don't say which body you're using it with. It's not Canon AF on any of the Sigmas, but it's still decent.

Cheers. It is latest DG HSM model. I have a 500 f4.5 and the HSM seems snappy. Would be used on either 5D and 1DsII.

Neilyb wrote in post #7409524
Right guys. I have read a reviews, even a comparison somewhere on here, but still I have reservations. MPB have a minty Sigma 300 2.8 for just over a grand...but it is not the fabled Canon, does not have IS...

How does it perform with TC's? Would it be sharper than the 120-300 2.8 (especially with TC'S?)....how fast is the focussing...fast enough for BIFs?

Hi Neil,

The Sigma 120-300 f2.8 is widely reported to out perform the Sigma 300 f2.8 in pretty much every way. I went through a similar assessment of the lens you are listing prior to getting the 120-300 f2.8. Since then, I have seen a lot of people using the 120-300, but only ever seen one Sigma 300 f2.8. Add in the added flexibility of the zoom, and it became a no brainer for me.

I do not know where these err99's are coming from that have been mentioned. I use my 120-300 on a 20D, 40D and a 1D mk II, and it works perfectly. I know a large number of people who shoot with the 120-300 on a regular basis, and I have never heard them mention Err99's.

AF speed and AF accuracy of the 120-300 will keep pace with single seater race cars coming straight down the barrell of the lens without any issue.

As for TC's, the 120-300 will take a 1.4XTC (either canon or sigma variety), with minimal loss of quality and speed. Things start to go wrong when you put a 2XTC onto it. Quality and focus speed / accuracy take a big hit. I certainly don't think that it would keep up reliably with BIF, particularly if said bird was flying erratically.

Hope this helps.


Simon.

The Archive, where you can see real-world results
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=141406

Hmmm, OK. I was hoping for a 300 that could double as a 420mm and a 600mm....btter rethink or fork out for the Canon.

Neilyb wrote in post #7409836
Hmmm, OK. I was hoping for a 300 that could double as a 420mm and a 600mm....btter rethink or fork out for the Canon.

120-300 can be used as a 420mm, but I wouldn't use it as a 600mm.

Neilyb wrote in post #7409836
Hmmm, OK. I was hoping for a 300 that could double as a 420mm and a 600mm....btter rethink or fork out for the Canon.

Right -- There is a reason the Canon costs so much.

S.Horton wrote in post #7409988
Right -- There is a reason the Canon costs so much.

Yeh, strong YENN!

I think you must remember that putting the 2x TC on not only doubles everything, but creates the same problems that any super long lens without IS has. I did a quick check and found that my 120-300 with a Sigma EX 2X TC did just fine as long as I increased my ISO to compensate with a much higher shutter speed and increased DOF as well. Of course there is a lot of noise, but this is just a demo. It can be sharp if all factors are in play of adequate shutter speed. This was at 3200 ISO, reported 433mm. I went back and did the same thing at 300x2 and the results were the same. These images have had no postprocessing other than jpg conversion and resizing smaller for this site.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

If your talking about USD, thats a really good price.

I paid $840 for my Tokina 300 2.8 (it comes tomorrow!!)

The OP was asking about BIF, not about static objects where AF speed and tracking ability is not important.

BiF is one thing, but with a 2X attached I would of course be using a tripod or monopod. BiF would not be the only quarry. I am just trying to work out if it is worth having a 300 2.8 (420 f4, 600 f5.6) as opposed to the less portable 500mm f4.5 (mostly used as 700mm f6.3). As if I sell the 500mm now, after the price increases, I can make a profit.

The price is not, unfortunately USD. 1150 UK pounds (1800 new).

I wouldn't use any of those lenses, not even the Canon, with a 2X TC for birds in flight. AF slows down too much with the 2x. I'd stick with the 500.

Yes, AF speed can be an issue. Wait until Musicmaster gets his Tokina and reports to us. I also found the AF speed to be too slow when using a 2X TC on the Canon 300/2.8. However it is a bit better using 2 1.4x TCs.