Sigma 120-400mm f/4.5-5.6 DG APO OS

Does anyone have any experience with this lens? I am seriously considering it to give me more reach than my 55-250mm and would like some feed back from owners. Also, if at all possible, I would like to see some pictures of the lens mounted to a camera. Unfortunately I do not think any of the local shops hae one of these in stock and I would like to get an idea of the actual size of the lens. I would very much appreciate any help you can give me with this.

Thank You,

Juan

Here's a picture to give you an idea of the size. This is actually for the 80-400 OS which was replaced by the 120-400. The 120-400 is slightly better, but not much. Size is about the same.

http://www.photozone.d​e …po-os-test-report--review

I had my copy for one day before I returned it. Nice featres but just not sharp enough for me. But, perhaps my other lenses spoil me.

Thanks for the help. I am really surprised no one seems to have more info on this lens. It seems like it would be a pretty good deal, and the reviews I have been able to find have been pretty positive on its performance. Anyone else with any first hand experience?

Thanks,

Juan

Juan A wrote in post #9394244
Thanks for the help. I am really surprised no one seems to have more info on this lens. It seems like it would be a pretty good deal, and the reviews I have been able to find have been pretty positive on its performance. Anyone else with any first hand experience?

Thanks,

Juan

There's a thread in the lens archive specifically for pictures taken with this lens. There are also countless numbers of threads with questions and answers just what you're looking for. Search and all will be revealed.

Mr. Green, Thank you for the input. My search fu must be week because I only found a handful of threads regarding this particular lens. Almost all were people looking for info, and most did not recieve much help. I did find the picture thread, but that was not 100% helpful either as most posts were very old and there were not as many examples as there are with other lens threads. So I was simply tring to find some more current info. Again, Thank you for taking the time to respond.

I used this lens many times. A friend of mine have it and i borrow it. This is a heavy lens if your are used to small lens. Not the kind of lens you walk around with for a day. For me, the focus was slow. I lost many shots because of that. The quality (picture speaking) is not very good. The lens have the tendency to overblown whites. If you want to shoot fast sports, it will be difficult. If you search, you could find a used Canon 100-400L for 400$ dollars more. (That's what i have done). Looks a lot more, but believe me, this is a 400 well spend. The 100-400 eat the other one in one bite.

Juan A wrote in post #9394244
Thanks for the help. I am really surprised no one seems to have more info on this lens. It seems like it would be a pretty good deal, and the reviews I have been able to find have been pretty positive on its performance. Anyone else with any first hand experience?

Thanks,

Juan

Most people suggest spending the extra and going for its bigger brother, the Sigma 150-500 or the Canon 100-400, thats why its not quite as talked about

Truthfully, you get what you pay for, its not as good as the Canon 100-400 and its not as long as the 150-500...

But sometimes, and i understand this trust me, that extra $300 will just break the bank for some people, and for the price, theres few alternatives to this lens [Its $900 now..I remember when the 150-500 was $850 and the 120-400 was $700..]

Used 100-400s go for $1250-1300 usually...is it worth it? In my opinion if you can spare it, yes, the Canon will also hold its value very well [Even if a new one launches]

Juan - here is a thread where I posted some sample shots with that lens: https://photography-on-the.net …910&highlight=r​emembrance

It was my first time using the lens and so far I'm happy with it. I'll know better when the air show season starts again.

ITS an awfull lens!!!,i had this lens for a few days before i returned it.

I wanted a good long range lens for birding,the photos this lens took

where very soft,the IS did'nt work properly,it was a very poor lens.

Please save your self the headaches this lens caused me! I ended up

buying the Canon 400 mm L prime for birding-its extrmerly good,also another option is Canon 100-400,well worth paying the extra-to get away
from that awfull sigma lens.

hope this helps,it cost me a bit to learn this

Well my 150-500 produces some excellent results, when the photographer gets it right and this was with a 1.4 extender on it as well.

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

I hesitated between the 120-400 and the 150-500; on average, the (numerous) comments and tests I found were more favorable to the 150-500.
I also wanted the extra reach (it was to be used on a full frame), then I went for the 150-500 (also the reason why I did not go for the Canon 100-400).
The 150-500 is not a lot more expensive that its small brother; for the price you can get it new, and thus be covered by the warranty in case you draw a lemon.
So far I'm very happy with my 150-500. A bit slow to AF, and a bit slow optically, but the quality of my 5D MKII in the high ISOS allows to stop down to f.8 / f.9 and still get excellent results (it's sharper stopped down than wide open anyway).
I also tried it on my 450D body that I have kept, and was happily surprised by the good quality of the pics I got.
In absolute quality it's probably below the Canon (and it's not weather sealed), but if you know its limits and handle it well, you will get quality pictures with no problem.