I've used both the Sigma and Canon III 2x's, very little in it, slight edge to the Canon but not really worth the extra cost IMHO
artyman Sleepless in Hampshire  More info | Apr 23, 2012 18:27 | #2086 I've used both the Sigma and Canon III 2x's, very little in it, slight edge to the Canon but not really worth the extra cost IMHO Art that takes you there. http://www.artyman.co.uk
LOG IN TO REPLY |
arentol Goldmember 1,305 posts Joined Jun 2009 Location: Seattle WA More info | Apr 24, 2012 13:33 | #2087 Some bird shots from this weekend with the 5d3 and 120-300 + Sigma 1.4x + Kenko 1.5x (630mm). This combo has some minor CA issues, but they are avoidable a lot of the time, and not that bad anyway.
5D3 | Rokinon 14 f/2.8 | 16-35L II | TS-E 24L | Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | Voigtlander 40 f/2.0 | Σ 50 f/1.4 | MP-E 65 | 70-200 2.8L IS II | Σ 85 f/1.4 | Zeiss 100 f/2 | Σ 120-300 f/2.8 OS | 580 EX II | 430 EX II | Fuji X10 | OM-D E-M5 | http://www.mikehjphoto.com/
LOG IN TO REPLY |
arentol Goldmember 1,305 posts Joined Jun 2009 Location: Seattle WA More info | Apr 24, 2012 13:43 | #2088 Some more, but this time from yesterday evening and again using the 5d3 with the 120-300 OS, but this time with only the Sigma 1.4x TC. I think the third one is pretty close to 100% crop. As you can see without the extra Kenko TC the results are actually better, even though I have to crop a little more.
420mm, 1/250, f/5, ISO 1600
420mm, 1/250, f/5, ISO 400 (Not my best shot, but I loved the expression on this guys little face).
420mm, 1/320, f/5.6, ISO 800
5D3 | Rokinon 14 f/2.8 | 16-35L II | TS-E 24L | Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | Voigtlander 40 f/2.0 | Σ 50 f/1.4 | MP-E 65 | 70-200 2.8L IS II | Σ 85 f/1.4 | Zeiss 100 f/2 | Σ 120-300 f/2.8 OS | 580 EX II | 430 EX II | Fuji X10 | OM-D E-M5 | http://www.mikehjphoto.com/
LOG IN TO REPLY |
RustyHammer Senior Member  685 posts Likes: 1 Joined Dec 2011 Location: New Orleans / New York More info | Apr 24, 2012 18:29 | #2089 ... SO, what happens when you add the Sigma 1.4x TC onto a crop body? Doesn't that make it almost a 675 mm lens, when you take the crop into consideration? How does it perform? Curious !!!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
arentol Goldmember 1,305 posts Joined Jun 2009 Location: Seattle WA More info | Apr 24, 2012 18:42 | #2090 There are a number of pictures on this thread taken with the 7d (or other crop bodies) and the Sigma 1.4xTC (or other brands of 1.4xTCs). With the crop bodies this is definitely a very nice birding lens thanks to the extra "reach" provided by the crop factor. Works even better with the 2xTCs for really long shots and small birds, 960mm equivalent. Go back to some of the early pages (about post 1150) and you can find a few shots of mine with the Sigma 2xTC. 5D3 | Rokinon 14 f/2.8 | 16-35L II | TS-E 24L | Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | Voigtlander 40 f/2.0 | Σ 50 f/1.4 | MP-E 65 | 70-200 2.8L IS II | Σ 85 f/1.4 | Zeiss 100 f/2 | Σ 120-300 f/2.8 OS | 580 EX II | 430 EX II | Fuji X10 | OM-D E-M5 | http://www.mikehjphoto.com/
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Apr 27, 2012 05:29 | #2091 I am considering getting this lens to replace my 150 - 500. What I'd like to know to is what is the subject distance on these photo's. I find I lose detail with my current lens as the distance increases. Gear List Canon 70D, Canon 40D, Canon 70 - 200 2.8 IS, Canon 400 5.6
LOG IN TO REPLY |
artyman Sleepless in Hampshire More info | Apr 27, 2012 07:14 | #2092 Losing detail as distance increases is not down to the lens but the extra crud in the atmosphere between you and the subject, double he distance double the atmospheric pollution. That's why the sun is red in the evening it gets filtered through a greater proportion of the atmosphere. Art that takes you there. http://www.artyman.co.uk
LOG IN TO REPLY |
FreekWijffels Mostly Lurking  17 posts Joined Feb 2011 Location: Netherlands More info | Apr 27, 2012 16:44 | #2094 |
Apr 28, 2012 01:24 | #2095 Thanks for the reply Ken, interesting to hear from someone who made the switch I am contemplating. I agree the 150 - 500 is a good lens, which makes justifying the expense of the 120 - 300 plus convertors that much more difficult for me Gear List Canon 70D, Canon 40D, Canon 70 - 200 2.8 IS, Canon 400 5.6
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tectortony Mostly Lurking 16 posts Joined Mar 2008 More info | Apr 29, 2012 05:32 | #2096 Does anyone use a UV filter on this lens and does it effect the image quality, the reason I ask is with a Canon 100-400 lens the filter DOES effect the quality of the image on my lens.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
freddyronny Senior Member 316 posts Joined Dec 2009 More info | Apr 29, 2012 10:32 | #2097 tectortony wrote in post #14347014  Does anyone use a UV filter on this lens and does it effect the image quality, the reason I ask is with a Canon 100-400 lens the filter DOES effect the quality of the image on my lens. A UV filter always affects IQ. Some UV filters less than others, but none will have a positive effect on the IQ. I would only use a filter when you know that you'll be using the lens in harsh conditions where flying objects could hit the front element, like for example motorcross. Most of the time the hood will suffice to protect the lens. Canon EOS 70D / Canon Eos 450D / Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 / Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 OS / Canon 50mm f/1.8 II - Canon 18-55mm IS / Kenko Pro 300 1.4 DG / Sigma 2x APO DG / Canon 430 EX II Flickr
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Apr 29, 2012 21:29 | #2098 Well, it looks like I'll be without my Sigma lens all of April (sent it in April 1 I think). Supposedly they were working on it last Thursday and were going to ship out Friday. I'll see. They never send any updates, or shipping notice. SONY A7RIII | SONY A7III | SONY RX10 IV | SONY RX100 | 24-70 2.8 GM | 70-200 2.8 GM | 16-35 F/4 | PZ 18-105 F/4 | FE 85 1.8 | FE 28-70 | SIGMA 35 1.4 ART | SIGMA 150-600 C | ROKINON 14 2.8
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tectortony Mostly Lurking 16 posts Joined Mar 2008 More info | May 01, 2012 03:34 | #2099 Probably a silly question but is there much difference in quality between using a 2x extender and using 2 --1.4 extenders stacked ? Thanks Tony
LOG IN TO REPLY |
May 01, 2012 21:58 | #2100 Bob Atkins review of the 120-300 2.8 OS
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is IoDaLi Photography 1820 guests, 115 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
