120-300f2.8 Vs 300f4

Thanks R Gibson,

Thanks for your post,

What do you think about what CCarroll posted?

I think MR986 is now going for the Nikkor 300 f4.

But I am still think I am going to go for the Sigma120-300 f2.8.

Do you think you could post us some 100% crop we could see?

Hope I am not asking for too much.
--
For ART

Here



Rich

that looks great Rich Gibson.

Rich, is the shot of the woodpecker with or without the TC?

Tx.

--
Gary - Casual hobbyist w/D 2 0 0 and other toys

Hi Rich,

If the 2nd shot woodpecker is really 100%cropped.
Than the 1st shot of the woodpecker must be chopped.
because it is only about 1500x2250 when you enlarge it up to match the 2nd shot.

OR

If the 1st shot is a full 3872 x 2362 size.
than the 2nd shot is not 100%.

sorry if I sound like a pain.

Unlike MR986, I think he has decided to go for the Nikkor 300mm f4.
I really want to like this lens.(120-300 f2.8)

So far I am only feeling 99%.

Wondering if any 120-300 owners could post somemore 100% crop pic at f2.8 for us.

I am sorry, if I am asking for too much.

Like I said before. I really really want this lens (sigma).

and I want to feel 100% before I spend the money.
as it is two time the cost of the Nikkor.

Many Thanks to you all so being so helpful.
--
For ART

Here are some 100% crops at f2.8 from the 120-300 that I returned because it was inferior to my 300 f4 AFS:

Here's a few test pics using of the 120-300 and 1.4xTC = 420mm. All shots at f4.5.

First is FF:



Second is 100% crop:



Third is FF:



Fourth is about 75% crop:



Note the very shallow DOF in the fourth - the rear of the rabbit is obviously out of focus.

I felt my lens was a bit soft and after testing found it was front focusing about 10mm. I shipped it to the Sigma repair facility for recalibration and am waiting for it to be returned.

--
Gary - Casual hobbyist w/D 2 0 0 and other toys

thanks CCarroll,
its very kind of you to send in the pics,
All 4 pics looks like it was shot on ISO 400 upward.
the last one looks like you are using ISO 1600 upward.

thanks agin
986

No. The pics are
1. 1/2000, 270 mm, ISO 100
2. 1/640, 300 mm, ISO 100
3. 1/400, 300 mm, ISO 400
4. 1/250, 200 mm, ISO 400

I never claimed they were great shots, just all I had at F 2.8 before sending the lens back


I really did want to like this lens because of its versatility. But after two bad Sigma $2500 lenses in a row, I decided to hold off on trying for another replacement or recalibration. I'm sure there are many good ones out there.

For context, here are the entire images, resized down to 1280 X 850

Geomaticsman said:

Rich, is the shot of the woodpecker with or without the TC?

Tx.

--
Gary - Casual hobbyist w/D 2 0 0 and other toys

Click to expand...

600 mm (with the 2.0 TC) @ 1/60th second f/10. I might add that the Nikon 2.0TC on my 300mm f4 and the 70-200VR was VERY soft; disappointing to the extent that 600mm shots with the 300 f/4 were all not good enough to post process.

The entire argument of whether the 300 f/2,8 Sigma is sharper than this zoom, or the Nikkor 300 f/4 is better or equal to this zoom is academic to me. This lens (which is a NEW Sigma zoom built this spring with new electronics..NOT one from last year) exceeds all my expectations. It is clearly well worth the $2289 I spent for it. In my life situation I will never be able to (or even want to) spend over $4000 for any lens.

Thanks, Rich

FOR ART said:

Hi Rich,

If the 2nd shot woodpecker is really 100%cropped.
Than the 1st shot of the woodpecker must be chopped.
because it is only about 1500x2250 when you enlarge it up to match
the 2nd shot.

OR

If the 1st shot is a full 3872 x 2362 size.
than the 2nd shot is not 100%.

sorry if I sound like a pain.

Unlike MR986, I think he has decided to go for the Nikkor 300mm f4.
I really want to like this lens.(120-300 f2.8)

So far I am only feeling 99%.

Wondering if any 120-300 owners could post somemore 100% crop pic
at f2.8 for us.

I am sorry, if I am asking for too much.

Like I said before. I really really want this lens (sigma).

and I want to feel 100% before I spend the money.
as it is two time the cost of the Nikkor.

Many Thanks to you all so being so helpful.
--
For ART

Click to expand...

On the second woodpecker image I posted I took the original size, blew it up to 100% and then cropped an approximately 1000 x 1000 image for uploading to Smugmug. The first one was resized for general display on Smugmug. I apologize if they are not adequately sized. I was only trying to help.

Perhaps you're looking too hard. Go with your feelings. I use the lens for birds in flight which I can't predict how close they'll be as well as my grand childrens' sports for the same reason. A 300mm prime does not meet my needs.

I might point out that if you search Fred Miranda for comments on the 120-300 as you go farther back in time in the reviews you will see remarks about sharpness on it. Be sure you are looking at the newest Sigma 120-300 which has new electronics. It lists in stores for $2689 but is available through several dealers for $2289. If you're looking for something around $2000 new it's the older 120-300. One might argue then that Signma's quality has been spotty...well, yes, it has. But like baseball you're only as good as your last at-bat. This lens is sharper than my older, used 300 f/4. I'm very happy with it.

Good luck; why not pick a date to make a decision by and move on it? You're missing many many shots if you procrastinate. If you are not happy, Nikon lenses sell well at places like FM or ar the Cafe.

Rich

How can one tell (especially via mail order) that they're getting the newest version of the Sigma?

Thanks

Look at the tripod foot, it has the hand shape and is longer. The newer one is also labeled DG if I understand correctly.

Need to get my few photos on to the web.

From the samples I am seeing of the 120-300 here, I really need the weather to hold an go take some more photos.

Dave

dezignman said:

How can one tell (especially via mail order) that they're getting
the newest version of the Sigma?

Thanks

Click to expand...

First of all here's their site information:
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3274&navigator=3

Here's the page with all their lens specifications
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_chart.asp

The seller's specifications should include all the items included on this page. These are the things I looked at before purchasing mine. In every case I made sure the mfg. part number from the best priced seller matched the one at some place like B&H Photo or Adorama....AND the nomenclature was identical. I've had my lens since early May and I noticed most are now asking $2689 and that tells me it's selling very well so they are less inclined to reduce the price.

Rich

Rich Gibson said:

600 mm (with the 2.0 TC) @ 1/60th second f/10....

Click to expand...

Wow, that's fantastic performance at 600mm. If mine even comes close after recalibration I'll be a VERY happy man.

Thanks Rich

--
Gary - Casual hobbyist w/D 2 0 0 and other toys

Thanks Rich Gibson.

WOW, that shot was done on a TCX2 !!!
That is sometime.
I never imaging 2XTC can look this look.
Thanks for all your help.
you're right.
I should just go ahead and get it.

Thanks again
--
For ART

that is probably a bad sample of 120-300. is non DG version ? you should try a focus test (read this):
http://focustestchart.com/chart.html

i think the sample tested on photozone.de is a bad sample to (field curvature flaw) because is under performance of the 100-300 f4. in reality is better (look fredmiranda.com reviews ... they are a few users that have them both, or look on pbase.com and compare images). so dont trust that test.

i have shot some raptors in fly (hawks and owls). i use a canon 300/f4+1.4xTC and is hard to track raptors with a 6-7 degree view. i was miss a few shots by taking my eye of the visor trying to see where the bird disappeared from my view. insted i use a 100-400 of a friend and i must say that a zoom have a clear advantage. you track bird at wide end then you zoom , autofocus and shot. then again to wide end and tracking.
sample photos with birds in fly and 120-300 + 1.4xTC:
http://www.pbase.com/scottmiron/image/74719943
or 120-300 + 2xTC
http://www.pbase.com/bugs77/image/78124711
(look more at those users, they have more)

p.s i'm considering this lens to because i want 400mm zoom and i want more IQ then canon 100-400 can give me.

Have you had any back-focus problems? I get a lot of shots (soccer) where I'm right on the subject, but the player behind the subject is sharper than my son. Any issues? Thanks.

Gil

agileimages said:

I shoot the 120-300 2.8 with and with a Sigma 1.4x TC. I find it
sufficiently sharp either way. I have never used the 300 f4, but my
120-300 is extremely flexible for sports action and it almost never
causes me to miss a shot for focus errors. I am very happy with it,
especially considering I paid $1500 for it used on eBay from
Shutterblade.
--
Nikon D200
Sigma 120-300 f2.8 HSM
Nikon 80-200 f2.8 AFS
Tokina 12-24 f4
Nikon 85 f1.8 D
Nikon 35 f2
Sigma 24-70 f2.8 EX DG

You Pay for What You Get - DMB

Click to expand...

I had AF issues on mine (sloppy + B/F focus) with a D200 and a Kodak cameras.

I sent the lens back to Sigma and they replaced the HSM unit and performed a firmware upgrade. Total cost € 119 (firmware upgrade free).

I don't have the D200 anymore for testing but AF is now very quick and in focus on my Kodak DCS Pro 14nx. Waiting for the D300/D3 to be fully sure.

Best regards,

Derek

Where is the focus?
Looks like the whole shot is out of focus or shaken somehow.