| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Sigma 300 2.8 HSM
Paul Roberts, Photographer, Student/Intern
 |
Cheltenham | UK | England | Posted: 5:05 PM on 02.24.10 |
| ->> Anyone used or use this lens? Any opinions on it? the AF in particular. Is it worth getting to fill the gap between Nikon 70-200 and a Nikon 400? |
|
Tom Suarez, Photographer
|
Austin | texas | USA | Posted: 5:09 PM on 02.24.10 |
| ->> I have been using the 120-300 2.8 and am very happy with it. I mostly use it for night football. It has been very sharp and fast to focus plus with a zoom I can adjust as needed. Mine is the older model and I have had it for about 4 years. |
|
Matthew Sauk, Photographer
|
Sandy | UT | United States | Posted: 7:08 PM on 02.24.10 |
->> I used the Sigma 300 for a few months, a few years ago.
Solid lens for the money. Colors were good, contrast was not as good as the Canon, but that can be easily fixed in post. |
|
Michael Durisseau, Photographer, Assistant
|
Santa Fe/Houston | TX | USA | Posted: 10:35 PM on 02.24.10 |
| ->> +1 on the 120-300 2.8. I even use it for basketball! I like the images even with a 1.4x. |
|
Scott Serio, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Colora | MD | USA | Posted: 1:04 AM on 02.25.10 |
->> I have the 120-300/2.8 as well. Sometimes in really dark conditions it wants to hunt for focus a bit, but overall it is will worth the money. You really can't beat that kind of versatility in a lens for the price. I think you can even hunt them down used for a quite a reasonable amount.
I will say this though. True Nikon glass versus Sigma glass, I think Sigma is maybe 90% as good as Nikon. I you are talking Sigma to start, then sure.
Granted, I think the general consensus might be that the Nikon 300/2.8 might be the sharpest lens, and most vibrant glass, on the planet. It is silly good. |
|
Paul Roberts, Photographer, Student/Intern
|
Cheltenham | UK | England | Posted: 2:38 AM on 02.25.10 |
->> Granted Scott, just thinking the an extra 2,900 British pounds for a lens that I'm going to use infrequently.
......mmmmmm |
|
Michael Okoniewski, Photographer
|
Syracuse | NY | USA | Posted: 12:44 PM on 02.25.10 |
->> I have the Sygma 120-300 2.8 AF lens and am very happy with it. I used it to replace my Canon 400 2.8 AF due to it's being too old to be serviced by Canon.
It's a small compromise over Canon or Nikon prime lenses, but a great value for the money. Especially with a 1.6x body. It's like a 70-200 on steroids. And as sports constitutes only 20& of my photography, I didn't see the value in another newer 400 2.8. And that 120-300 focal length really helped out my football. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|