Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 EX OS

micloi wrote in post #13431694
Very nice!

Did you use a tripod or flash?
Could we please have the exif data for the shots?

Thanks

Thanks! Yes, flash and tripod. You can see the EXIF if you save the full frame versions and check exif. The crops don't have it.

gabebalazs wrote in post #13431750
Thanks! Yes, flash and tripod. You can see the EXIF if you save the full frame versions and check exif. The crops don't have it.

Had a look, thanks! The teleconverters do not seem to be reporting ones, which ones are you using?

my 2x is a non-reporting one, a cheap old Kenko C-AF MC7. My 1.4 is a reporting one, Kenko 1.4 Pro DG. This time I did not post any pics with just the 1.4 tc

Thanks, I appreciate the info. I also have the 2x DG and the 2x MC7 and I will run some comparisons with the 2x III

micloi wrote in post #13431851
Thanks, I appreciate the info. I also have the 2x DG and the 2x MC7 and I will run some comparisons with the 2x III

That'd be awesome, very interested!

Got my lens today, and rather than sample shots the light broke slightly through the misty sky so I went out and took some wildlife shots as this lens is intended to be used. I was really impressed, these were taken with the 1.4x TC Canon, at iso 1600, cropped to around 10Mpx (ish) and fully processed. There's more info on my flickr and in the exif. So far Im quite impressed by the sharpness, lots to try out and a 2x TC to get soon!

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/acwildlife/6377​362733/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/acwildlife/6377​535349/

Nice images, Ashley. I'll be following your images closely as you are using it as I would want to. I'd be interested in any specific comments you have to make as a bird photographer (speed of focus with TC for BIF, etc.). It doesn't look like I'll be able to afford the 500/4 any time soon and I'm seriously considering this one. What body are you using it with?

Nice tits

I am also predominantly a bird photographer (besides my real estate photo stuff) and will post a bunch of pics here as soon as I can go out and shoot some birds. Got my lens last week, unfortunately the timing (winter) was not good

icassell wrote in post #13432071
I'll be following your images closely as you are using it as I would want to. I'd be interested in any specific comments you have to make as a bird photographer (speed of focus with TC for BIF, etc.). It doesn't look like I'll be able to afford the 500/4 any time soon and I'm seriously considering this one.

Ditto.

gabebalazs wrote in post #13432304
Nice tits

it never gets old

I've added you on Flickr so I can keep track of your progress with this lens

nope never does lol

So far I've found in bad light and with a Canon 1.4x TC the AF speed is fairly good, I'd say about 1.5 Seconds from minimum focus to infinity. Im hoping to try it soon in good light and evaluate the bif AF Speed, I hope it can keep up as I've seen good shots from air shows with this lens at a 1.4x TC. I'll keep reporting back on my thoughts but so far in terms of sharpness Im very happy. Also OS is silent in Use just a slight click when switched on and off.

Congrats Gabe. How does it perform wide open, no TCs?

Waldemar Sikorski wrote in post #13433141
Congrats Gabe. How does it perform wide open, no TCs?

thanks!
Simply excellent, sharp at f/2.8, but it does improve a bit at f/4. Hardly any CA. OS is great too. I can't comment on BIF shots yet but AF seems to be pretty fast.

I will be following this thread with curiosity in regards to the wildlife shooting. I would love to get the new 200-400 but that's not happening for a LONG time. This seems like it could be a good option. I'd be curious to see a comparison between this lens and 1.4x tc and the 100-400 native. My guess is that this lens would be sharper (even with the tc), especially if stopped down to f/5.6

Kayak photo wrote in post #13433225
I will be following this thread with curiosity in regards to the wildlife shooting. I would love to get the new 200-400 but that's not happening for a LONG time. This seems like it could be a good option. I'd be curious to see a comparison between this lens and 1.4x tc and the 100-400 native. My guess is that this lens would be sharper (even with the tc), especially if stopped down to f/5.6

We are in the same boat. I usually stop down my 100-400 to f7.1 for best results, so this Siggy and 1.4x tc should be much better (with an extra 20mm - it all counts!)

I'd say a very good copy of the 100-400L (like the one I traded for the Sigma) can get close to the sigma + 1.4x TC but it also comes down to the TC. I believe that even TCs have have good copies bad copies.
My primary goal with trading the 100-400L was to gain the extra stop at 400/420mm and be able to shoot at 600mm at f/5.6 (most often stopped down to 6.3) while having AF. I love shallow DoF in nature shots but I definitely can't afford a 500 f/4 or 600 f/4 (not to mention the 800 f/5.6).
I think this Sigma 120-300 OS is a great gap filler between the $1500 100-400L and the 4K+ superteles.

I just wish it was May...