sigma 100-300 f4 or sony 70-300G

I'm considering these two lenses and plan a trip to the local shops to test them shortly .

does anyone have the current sigma 100-300 f4 and how do you rate it? Any sample pics?
Can anyone compare it with the sony 70-300G?

I can find very little information on the sigma lens online but what little i have been able to find indicates it is excellent. If it really is so good though, why do we hear so little about it?

Look at dyxum for some great reviews:
http://www.dyxum.com/reviews/lenses/reviews.asp?IDLens=269

http://www.photozone.de/

They're both great lens. I like the weight of 70-300G which is about 1/2 heavy of Sig 100-300F4. So it's up to you if constant F4 is important to you. If my 3.5 y/o daughter is serious in ice skating, i may thinking of getting one of these or a 70-200 f2.8.

--
Jack
A300 jpeg shooter

I have the 70300G and the Tokina 100-300 f4 Gold Ring. Both deliver great IQ but my eye slightly prefers the Tokina. Can't go wrong with either one.

The Sony feels light as a feather compared to the Tokina. IMO it comes down to weight and if you shoot in low light.

BTW I picked up the Tokina for $379 from KEH and it looks brand new, so its 1/2 the price of the Sony.

Perhaps you may want to also consider the Tokina 100-300 f4 lens in your decision. Good luck !

glaopt1 said:

I'm considering these two lenses and plan a trip to the local shops to test them shortly .

does anyone have the current sigma 100-300 f4 and how do you rate it? Any sample pics?
Can anyone compare it with the sony 70-300G?

I can find very little information on the sigma lens online but what little i have been able to find indicates it is excellent. If it really is so good though, why do we hear so little about it?

Click to expand...

I have the lens and like it a lot. I picked it over the Sony. It is constant F4 which comes in handy quite often. The build quality is excellent.

With practice you can handhold it, but I prefer a tripod or monopos as it will get to be a load on my @700 with grip.

You can add the Sigma matched 1.4 tc. Very little degradation in resolution and the A700 will autofocus just fine with this combo.

Hi,

I can comment only about the Sigma 4/100-300 which I own. Form my point of view it's an absolut top notch lens in its class, pro-class build, real usable f/4 (of course at 300mm and f/4 DOF is very shallow) and very useful range extention with the matched Sigma 1,4TC with very little degradation. It has the right weight and balance for working in the tele range, handheld or on monopod or tripod and due to internal focussing and zooming it doesn't change size. Maybe the main downside is the odd tripod collar which difficults zooming sometimes. Focussing is fast with lens only and slows down a bit with the TC.

Edit: I forgot from f/5.6 / 6.3 on super sharp
--
Cheers,
Michael Fritzen

I have the Sigma 100-300 for my A900, but can't comment on the Sony lens.

The Sig's image quality is very good to my mind. The 1.4x TC is also very good, although there is noticeable vignetting with full frame (easily correctable in PS). AF is reasonably fast on the A900, and I have successfully shot winter rally cross with this combo. I don't shoot a lot of sport, though, so I can't comment further on that.

The lens is big and heavy though - with the lens hood it looks enormous. It won't fit in all camera bags.

As for photos....check out photos from my California trip last spring. I shoot exclusively with the Sigma 24-70 and Sigma 100-300, so if it was shot longer than 70mm, it was with the 100-300. Images aren't full size, but you can get the idea:

http://smcclearn.smugmug.com/Travel/California/8356014_7AnDR#548014334_qqBxJ

Rally cross photos (all with the 100-300) are at:

http://smcclearn.smugmug.com/Cars/Rally-Sport-Jan-2009/7148794_ZeVzX#467306557_zyRRj

--
Sandy
Naval and Maritime Photography
http://smcclearn.smugmug.com/

Two different lenses. I would think that Sigma beats the G lens by the tiniest margin in IQ department and might have a slightly better bokeh but it comes with a price a heavy price. It is twice as heavy and a bit larger. It is not really a lens you like to carry around much.

--

http://frenske.zenfolio.com/

I can't speak to the Sony but I do own the Sigma 100-300 f4 APO DG and Sony a900 body. I am a landscape shooter and always photograph with a heavy tripod, MLU, and a cable release (when it hasn't fallen off my camera as the cheap Osaka releases seem to like to do). I am very impresed with the Sigma's image quality. The best example I have is this panorama of 15 vertical images stitched together: http://www.brettdeacon.com/photo.php?id=526&gallery=GrandTetons . It is tack sharp at 100% magnification.

At 100mm, center sharpness is actually equal to, or possibly slightly better, than my (amazing) Minolta 100 2.8 macro. Center sharpness is excellent at all focal lengths. The extreme corners are less sharp for closer subjects, but generally not in a noticeably annoying manner (e.g., not as much of a problem as with my Zeiss 24-70 2.8). Center sharpness is good wide open. Bokeh is very good. Properly focused images are as good at 100% magnification as those taken with the Zeiss 24-70 2.8 and Minolta 100 2.8 macro (my other two lenses, both of which are outstanding).

On the downside, I've run into fairly consistent problems with image softness due to camera shake. I always use a heavy carbon fiber tripod and the 2-second timer which includes mirror lock-up, and at least 1/3 of my photos with this lens are less than tack sharp due to vibration. My explanation is that this is a big and heavy lens, and even when tightened on the tripod as much as my strength will allow and when used with perfect technique, the slightest vibration will be evident in the results. I've noticed, for example, that it's not even worth trying to use this lens in 20+ mph winds. I haven't used very large, long lenses before and can't comment on whether this phenomenon is to be expected with other lenses the size of the Sigma 100-300. I should note that my technique and standards are specific to those of a highly perfectionistic landscape photographer used to using a 4x5 camera. Those who might be using handholding this lens may have different needs and results. I hope this is helpful.

Great area.

I snowboarded a few days there last winter and did two days of mountainbike there in October.

If I was not already living in Steamboat Springs I would be tempted to move there - my favorite ski mountain in the US.
--
tom power

Thankyou everyone for your comments - this has been very very helpful.

I will also have a look at the tokina but I really think my heart is set on the sigma.

The dyxxum reviews are similar to all the comments here - excellent IQ but watch the weight.

Brett - absolutely stunning images on your website. Truly inspirational. Thankyou for your detailed comments.

Alexander - thankyou for your advice. Some fine images here.

Thanks! You get no sympathy from me for living in Steamboat Springs. Absolutely awesome town. Consider yourself lucky! You get great snow in the winter but it's nowhere near as cold there as in Jackson. I live in Laramie, Wyoming and am only a few hours from you. Try to visit as often as I can.

went teleing today but have to say the snow was horrible. We neeed at least 7 or 8 feet to get some coverage - still bare spots all over the place. Recognize this?



Moore barn near base area.
--
tom power

glaopt1 said:

I'm considering these two lenses and plan a trip to the local shops to test them shortly .

does anyone have the current sigma 100-300 f4 and how do you rate it? Any sample pics?

Click to expand...

Very good lens.

glaopt1 said:

Can anyone compare it with the sony 70-300G

I can find very little information on the sigma lens online but what little i have been able to find indicates it is excellent. If it really is so good though, why do we hear so little about it?

Click to expand...

It is not exactly cheap. It is a lot more expensive than the Tokina 100-300mm f/4 for example.

Hi Brett,

same here. First I thought it might be the tripod, too shaky, too light but I got quite similar results on a sturdier tripod. Some month ago I read an article on Michael Reichmann's site luminous landscape where he reported sub-optimal results with his new Phase One 65 back and he concluded that the too short MLU delay was responsible for that. This made me think that this may be the same here: 2 sec may be too short for vibrations of that heavy setup damp down. How sensitive to vibrations the setup is can be easily tested by tapping at the lens or the body slightly with the finger while looking through the viewfinder. It may be firm in place but "bad vibrations" - not the "good ones" will occur.
--
Cheers,
Michael Fritzen

Hi Michael. Thanks for the information! That indeed sounds plausible. I'll have to conduct some tests to check the effects of longer MLU delays on sharpness. I wouldn't be surprised if that is the culprit.

FWIW, I seem to remember reading something a while back, possibly in particular relation to Sony, that indicated that the 2-second delay and MLU were ineffective in eliminating mirror-related vibration within a select range of shutter speeds - possibly from 1/30s down to 2s, or something like that. If so, slower than 2s or faster than 1/30s would be unaffected.

I don't remember where I saw the article / story, nor do I remember the exact range of shutter speeds where the problem was.

One thing I have noticed is that even with the MLU, the shutter seems to shake the camera a fair bit on its own.

The other thing that has annoyed the heck out of me is the effect that heat haze has on long telephoto images. I take a lot of ship photos at 300mm to 450mm (with the TC), and on the A900 the distortion caused by heat rising from the earth or water can be very noticeable, causing the image to be quite soft as a result.

Regards,

Sandy
--
Sandy
Naval and Maritime Photography
http://smcclearn.smugmug.com/

Hi Sandy,

those are the limits of using long tele. And sometimes only the old "zooming in by your feet" as far at it is possible will provide better results. I think quite often a lens is blamed for lacking IQ when the real culprits were the atmospheric conditions and the distance to the subject.
--
Cheers,
Michael Fritzen

Sounds like your set for the sigma - I really can't comment on that - but have some sigma lenses I love.

I just thought I'd comment on the 70-300G I have this lens and love it, very sharp, great bokeh, can be handheld - it was always good on my a100 - but now with my a700 it's even better, coupled with the ssm motor it truly is a joy to use.

Regards

Paddy