Reading mode: Light Dark

Sigma 120-300/f2.8 and Nikon 300/f4

Go to last post
R

Ryder221010

Senior Member
Messages
1,195
Reaction score
1
Location
MI, US
Hi:

Anybody have experience comparing these two at f4/300mm or know of a site that does?

Also, I assume the Nikon will do far better with a 1.4tc.

Thanks,
Craig Ryder
 
Thanks for the in depth response!

Care to share the what fors of your experience ?

Have you put a 1.4 on the Sigma and fired away at 300mm?

Cheers
Craig
 
Ryder said:
Hi:

Anybody have experience comparing these two at f4/300mm or know of
a site that does?

Also, I assume the Nikon will do far better with a 1.4tc.

Thanks,
Craig Ryder
Click to expand...
--

Craig: Don't sell the Sigma short. I have several Nikon lenses but not the 300 f/4. I do have the Sigma 120-300 and have taken several thousand shots with it...most with the Sigma 1.4tc. I use it mostly for action shots...soccer tournament pics, baseball/softball, etc. I have never been disappointed with its sharpness, superquick autofocus, etc. Considering that it is already a faster lens than the Nikon I can get good shots when I need shallow depth of field. I used to use my sigma 50-500 for most tele shots but now use the 120-300 with 1.4 almost exclusively.
I have also used it for wildlife shots with excellent results.
regards
Bernie
 
Hi Bernard:

Thanks for your reply. Much appreciated. I've heard good things about the 120-300. I guess on paper it should be better focusing than the Nikon 300/f4 when both are used with a tc as auto focus has a full stop more of light. (AF-S and HSM being somewhat equal)

On the other hand, if you go by the general rule one would think that a prime wouldl be sharper than a zoom with a tc. Especially when the Zoom is operating at max.

Personally, I've had good results with Sigma too. (I use the 12-24 and 70-200) and they aren't blown away by my nikon glass at all. I'm not one to sell them short and would never buy a lens without looking at Sigma's EX-HSM line-up. At the same time the Nikon 300/f4 AF-S might be one of the best buys in Nikon's lineup.

Like you , I'm looking for something to use for some sports (track) and close wildlife.

Thanks,
Bernard Williams said:
Ryder said:
Hi:

Anybody have experience comparing these two at f4/300mm or know of
a site that does?

Also, I assume the Nikon will do far better with a 1.4tc.

Thanks,
Craig Ryder
Click to expand...
--
Craig: Don't sell the Sigma short. I have several Nikon lenses but
not the 300 f/4. I do have the Sigma 120-300 and have taken several
thousand shots with it...most with the Sigma 1.4tc. I use it
mostly for action shots...soccer tournament pics,
baseball/softball, etc. I have never been disappointed with its
sharpness, superquick autofocus, etc. Considering that it is
already a faster lens than the Nikon I can get good shots when I
need shallow depth of field. I used to use my sigma 50-500 for
most tele shots but now use the 120-300 with 1.4 almost exclusively.
I have also used it for wildlife shots with excellent results.
regards
Bernie
Click to expand...
 
The only reason, in my mind to consider the 120-300 is if you absolutely must have zoom. If not, go with the 300 f/4 nikkor! I own the 300, the 70-200 vr, the 100-300 sig, and and the 120-300 sig. The sigs, the 120-300 and the 100-300 are compairable to the 80-400 vr nikkor in image quality (my own testing and personal experence). They will not beat the quality of the 300 f/4 nikkor (my own personal testing and personal experence). But, you have to ask yourself what you want to shoot and how sharp you need your images. Like I said, if you dont need the zoom of the 120-300 get the 300 f/4 nikkor!
Larry Loves Nikon said:
it's my recent shot with a sigma 100-300 f4 hsm+sigma 1.4x



--
Nikon?Sigma?hoh
Click to expand...
 
Hi ryder from my own personal experience the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 is optically as good as the 300 f2.8 nikkor AFS when I was looking into purchasing a something up to 300 mm for handheld work I hired the nikkor and borrowed the Sigma.

For the work I wanted to use it for birds in-flight the Sigma would have been preferable I am not the only person who thinks this I have read several tests in the UK press regarding the Sigma and its optical quality most of the testers were amazed how sharp this lens is some said even better than the nikkor.

In the end I settled on the 100-300 f4 HSM as I already have the 500 and the 800 HSM’s and I use the nikkor 1.4 and 2x AFS telly converters on my Sigma lenses. The Sigma telly converters are of very high optical quality I use my 1.4 and 2x occasionally on my 100-300 the only reason I do not use them all the time is that they switch the AF function off when using my 500 and 800 and the nikkor's don't.

Phillip.

D1x 800m @ f5.6

 
Thanks Phillip:

Boy, I'd love to have the collection of Sigma Telephotos that you have.

I'm going to get the 500mm too.

Cheers,
Craig Ryder
tomoo1000 said:
Hi ryder from my own personal experience the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 is
optically as good as the 300 f2.8 nikkor AFS when I was looking
into purchasing a something up to 300 mm for handheld work I hired
the nikkor and borrowed the Sigma.

For the work I wanted to use it for birds in-flight the Sigma
would have been preferable I am not the only person who thinks this
I have read several tests in the UK press regarding the Sigma and
its optical quality most of the testers were amazed how sharp this
lens is some said even better than the nikkor.

In the end I settled on the 100-300 f4 HSM as I already have the
500 and the 800 HSM’s and I use the nikkor 1.4 and 2x AFS telly
converters on my Sigma lenses. The Sigma telly converters are of
very high optical quality I use my 1.4 and 2x occasionally on my
100-300 the only reason I do not use them all the time is that
they switch the AF function off when using my 500 and 800 and the
nikkor's don't.

Phillip.

D1x 800m @ f5.6

Click to expand...
 
Hi Ryder it may be worth waiting a few months because Sigma are just about to release a new 300 f2.8 500 f4.5 & 800 f5.6 prime lenses with new optical coatings for digital all HSM EX’s

Phillip.
 
Hi Phillip:

Thanks for the info I did not know that. I'll look for some additional information on that. It will be along wait as spring is starting to show up around here.

Cheers
Craig Ryder
tomoo1000 said:
Hi Ryder it may be worth waiting a few months because Sigma are
just about to release a new 300 f2.8 500 f4.5 & 800 f5.6 prime
lenses with new optical coatings for digital all HSM EX’s

Phillip.
Click to expand...
 
owo,,,, 800 f5.6,my god, great lens,,,,,

My next step is to get a Powermac G5 Dual 1.8g
Ryder said:
Thanks for the info I did not know that. I'll look for some
additional information on that. It will be along wait as spring is
starting to show up around here.

Cheers
Craig Ryder
tomoo1000 said:
Hi Ryder it may be worth waiting a few months because Sigma are
just about to release a new 300 f2.8 500 f4.5 & 800 f5.6 prime
lenses with new optical coatings for digital all HSM EX’s

Phillip.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Nikon?Sigma?hoh
 
Hi there Craig. You know I have the 120-300 and the 50-500 sigmas. I have never used a 300 nikon. The reason I purchased the sigma was because of the f/2.8, I use it often, almost allways with the sigma 2 x TC and yes, I do get degredation, but very minor, but I still have an affordable lens from 120-600mm and all the lengths still let the auto focus work on my D70 and D2H even AF-C, which when you get to f6.3 thinks it is on the edge and looses a lot, but back at f/5.6, 95% keepers!

I am trying a few different things at the moment to improve the quality of shots, and one thing is shooting NEF and using Rawshooter essentials, wow, I am getting great results.

The other course is to do what Recalcitant Ron did, just buy the 300 Nikon f/2.8 AF-S ED.........He seems happy with it but haven't seen him posting lately. His story was buy best first, and keep it. But, I don't know if the nikon is the best in this situation.

Sorry if I haven't been much help buddy, but if I had a quick answer, I would be worth a lot of money!
Warm regards, Dave.

Have a look at my gallery if you feel the need.
http://www.dksphotography.smugmug.com

 
Hi Tomoo, I want to buy the 100-300 f/4 Sigma and an 1.4x teleconverter. Should I buy the Sigma one or the Nikkor one? Which one has the faster autofocus? Thanks!

P.S. Is it possible to use a 2x teleconverter with the 100-300 and still use autofocus?
 
Hey dave,

I did finally buy this lens, it's fantastic! I was shooting alongside my area's premier sports shooter the other night (His photos typically run full width in color across the sports page of his paper). He commented on the lens, he hadn't seen it before. I toldhim it was a 2.8 zoom.."wow, that's incredible...why would any sports photog buy a 300mm prime when you can get the zoom?"

He was using his 400mm f/2.8 and was switching between that and his 70-200...while I was snapping away!

How did your shoot go??
 
qazuhb

Hi that's quite a difficult choice really if you need a zoom occasionally then I would get the sigma lens but if you don't require a zoom then get in the nikkor I think you would be hard pressed to see any real difference in print quality between the two lenses the sigma will not autofocus with the two times converter this is where the nikkor will have some advantage as you can use the TC1.7 with this lens and still retain autofocus.

Phillip.
 
My shoot was great fun, I had an absolute ball! The paper loved the shots and are doing a full page spread in the next edition, (weekly sports paper), so I hope they have a really good quality printer because the pics came up well.

Here is one from the race track just behind me. All this while I was working out what the hell my client might want next, 300 things happening at once, but I stayed focused and followed my nose. I handed over 200 shots from around 600 taken. Pretty good ratio considering there were a few runs of 8 per second in there.



I hope the sigma performs well for you.
Warm regards, Dave.

Have a look at my gallery if you feel the need.
http://www.dksphotography.smugmug.com

 
Thanks Phillip, I think I'll get the 100-300 Sigma and the 1.7 Nikkor then, these would give an effective aperture of 6.8 and still autofocus, right?

Do you think I should keep my used 80-200 f/2.8 Nikkor once I get the 100-300? Has the Nikkor zoom any image quality advantages over the Sigma (i.e. better contrast, bokeh, less pincushion, etc.)??
Thanks again!
tomoo1000 said:
qazuhb

Hi that's quite a difficult choice really if you need a zoom
occasionally then I would get the sigma lens but if you don't
require a zoom then get in the nikkor I think you would be hard
pressed to see any real difference in print quality between the two
lenses the sigma will not autofocus with the two times converter
this is where the nikkor will have some advantage as you can use
the TC1.7 with this lens and still retain autofocus.

Phillip.
Click to expand...
 
I think you will end up dissapointed at f/6.3. you will be pushing the camera to its limits and it may fail more than not.
Warm regards, Dave.

Have a look at my gallery if you feel the need.
http://www.dksphotography.smugmug.com

 
Hi Dave, is for that reason that I was considering the 1.4 TC in the first place, Phillip's answer made me think of the 1.7 but I don't want a "nominal" AF capability that is actually not practical.
Which one of the 1.4's would you choose, the Nikkor or the Sigma???
I'm interested in hearing all opinions I can get. Thanks!
Daves602 said:
I think you will end up dissapointed at f/6.3. you will be pushing
the camera to its limits and it may fail more than not.
Warm regards, Dave.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top