Reading mode: Light Dark

Best Price - Sigma 120-300/2.8 EX

Go to last post
Why would you buy a Sigma 120-300 2.8 zoom when you can spend a little more and get a used 300 2.8L Canon that is one of the sharpest lenses in the world? It will focus faster, hold its value better is more usable with converters, and its lot better built. Theres a reason why the Sigma costs even less than their prime 300 2.8. You get what you pay for.
David Perkins said:
Any suggestions on where to get the best price on the Sigma
120-300/2.8 EX.

Thanks in advance,
David

--
http://www.pbase.com/perkinsd
http://www.perkins-photo.com
Click to expand...
--
Joe
 
Call Norman Camera and talk to Kelly. The number is listed on their website. http://www.normancamera.com Make sure you talk to Kelly. I personally had one and decided to opt for the 300mm Canon. You can do a search for my posts in regard to this. If you do buy it be prepared for a very heavy lens with a very stiff zoom ring. Also I have seen them on Ebay.

Jason
David Stoepfel said:
dave
Joe Journalist said:
David Perkins said:
Any suggestions on where to get the best price on the Sigma
120-300/2.8 EX.

Thanks in advance,
David

--
http://www.pbase.com/perkinsd
http://www.perkins-photo.com
Click to expand...
--
Joe
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Jason Stoller [email protected]

We are just Beta Testers who pay the Camera Companies to test their new products!
 
I am sorry but to suggest a 300mm prime when a person is asking about a 3x zoom range is wrong. Of course the gentlemen wants the ability of a zoom. Sure the 300mm Canon is better than the 120-300 Sigma. It is also better than the 70-200 L, and a good deal better than the 16-35 L from what I have read here. What in the heck does that have to do with anything? If an expensive prime can't beat a zoom it shouldn't be an expensive prime.

One question Joe Journalist? How long did you have the Sigma 120-300? Can you show us your test shots? Undoubtedly from your "you get what you pay for" remark ($1800 is a fortune to me and most people so my hat is off to you) you had this lens for a good long trial period and tested it extensively.

Thanks

Dave
Joe Journalist said:
David Perkins said:
Any suggestions on where to get the best price on the Sigma
120-300/2.8 EX.

Thanks in advance,
David

--
http://www.pbase.com/perkinsd
http://www.perkins-photo.com
Click to expand...
--
Joe
Click to expand...
--
Dave
 
dave nitsche said:
I am sorry but to suggest a 300mm prime when a person is asking
about a 3x zoom range is wrong. Of course the gentlemen wants the
ability of a zoom. Sure the 300mm Canon is better than the 120-300
Sigma. It is also better than the 70-200 L, and a good deal better
than the 16-35 L from what I have read here. What in the heck does
that have to do with anything? If an expensive prime can't beat a
zoom it shouldn't be an expensive prime.

One question Joe Journalist? How long did you have the Sigma
120-300? Can you show us your test shots? Undoubtedly from your
"you get what you pay for" remark ($1800 is a fortune to me and
most people so my hat is off to you) you had this lens for a good
long trial period and tested it extensively.

Thanks

Dave
Click to expand...
Dave I can really appreciate your thoughts and your statements. I am not suggesting

the Sigma 120-300 2.8 is a bad lens, but from my experience with it personally, the stiffness

of the zoom ring makes the zoom useless to me. If Sigma would fix that then I might consider it ,

because I really wanted and felt I needed a zoom in the range. The other question here, and the reason

I think others are discouraging the purchase of the Sigma, is because if you compare picture quality the 300mm

2.8 Canon , the Canon will shine. I found the Sigma 120-300 2.8 constructed very well but I thought the placement

and design of the tripod collar could have been better. I also had trouble getting the hood on and off of that lens when I

mounted the 105mm Ex UV filter on the front of it that Sigma had designed for it. I will not say my testing conditions

were perfect by any means. I am not an expert when it comes to testing lenses. I can only tell you what my turn offs were.

I was really hoping that the Sigma would work out for me, but unfortunately it didn't. I was fortunate enough to find

a Canon 300 2.8 non IS brand new on the shelf at a dealer. Since this lens now is only available in the IS version I

considered myself very lucky. I have been very happy with my choice. So I gave up on having the Sigma, because of

what I have mentioned above. Maybe that lens will work out for someone else, but unfortunately it did not for me.

Jason
dave nitsche said:
Joe Journalist said:
David Perkins said:
Any suggestions on where to get the best price on the Sigma
120-300/2.8 EX.

Thanks in advance,
David

--
http://www.pbase.com/perkinsd
http://www.perkins-photo.com
Click to expand...
--
Joe
Click to expand...
--
Dave
Click to expand...
--
Jason Stoller [email protected]

We are just Beta Testers who pay the Camera Companies to test their new products!
 
David as far as I know I am not the only one that has encountered the stiffness of the zoom ring. When I say stiff, I mean I have to make a real effort to turn the zoom ring and I have pretty strong hands. In my opinion it is so stiff it will slow you down or cause you to lose an opportunity to capture the image you want if you shoot sports, wildlife, or other faster moving objects. If you shoot basically stills then I guess you could adapt. There are only a few others here that have posted about this lens, but each one said the zoom ring was very stiff so I know it was not just my copy.

Jason
David Perkins said:
Jason Stoller wrote:
"...I am not suggesting the Sigma 120-300 2.8 is a bad lens, but
from my experience with it personally, the stiffness of the zoom
ring makes the zoom useless to me..."

Is this an isolated issue or have other people had this same
problem. How stiff do you consider stiff?

David
--
http://www.pbase.com/perkinsd
http://www.perkins-photo.com
Click to expand...
--
Jason Stoller [email protected]

We are just Beta Testers who pay the Camera Companies to test their new products!
 
Jason Stoller said:
I think others are discouraging the purchase of the Sigma, is
because if you compare picture quality the 300mm
2.8 Canon , the Canon will shine.
Click to expand...
At 300mm, I'm sure the 300mm prime will shine. How good is the image quality of the 300mm at say 250mm, 200mm or say 150mm. I bet the Sigma 120-300mm does a much better job of rendering the image:-) I also bet that the 300mm prime is a no show at those other focal lengths.

They're two different lenses that serve two different purposes.

Why would anybody try and compare a pickup truck with a sports car. Talking about lame here folks:-)

Well my sports car out handles your pickup truck in the hills. Aaaaah is that while the trunk is empty or carrying three thousands pounds of sheetrock. Bet my pickup truck will out handle "ANY" sports car while carrying three thousand pounds of sheetrock and the V-10 will have no trouble getting the sheetrock up the hill:-)

Courses for horses people:-)
 
Thomas Gardner said:
Jason Stoller said:
I think others are discouraging the purchase of the Sigma, is
because if you compare picture quality the 300mm
2.8 Canon , the Canon will shine.
Click to expand...
At 300mm, I'm sure the 300mm prime will shine. How good is the
image quality of the 300mm at say 250mm, 200mm or say 150mm. I bet
the Sigma 120-300mm does a much better job of rendering the
image:-) I also bet that the 300mm prime is a no show at those
other focal lengths.
Click to expand...
Funny, I owned the Sigma lens and I just stated my opinion in regard to it and explained what I did personally. Since you are commenting on how good you think the Sigma 120-300 2.8 is at different focal lengths, I am sure you have personal experience in regard to this! So why don't you post some pictures from your Sigma 120-300 if you even have one and help the original poster make a good decision.
Thomas Gardner said:
They're two different lenses that serve two different purposes.

Why would anybody try and compare a pickup truck with a sports car.
Talking about lame here folks:-)

Well my sports car out handles your pickup truck in the hills.
Aaaaah is that while the trunk is empty or carrying three thousands
pounds of sheetrock. Bet my pickup truck will out handle "ANY"
sports car while carrying three thousand pounds of sheetrock and
the V-10 will have no trouble getting the sheetrock up the hill:-)

Courses for horses people:-)
Click to expand...
--
Jason Stoller [email protected]

We are just Beta Testers who pay the Camera Companies to test their new products!
 
Jason Stoller said:
Funny, I owned the Sigma lens and I just stated my opinion in
regard to it and explained what I did personally. Since you are
commenting on how good you think the Sigma 120-300 2.8 is at
different focal lengths, I am sure you have personal experience in
regard to this! So why don't you post some pictures from your
Sigma 120-300 if you even have one and help the original poster
make a good decision.
Click to expand...
Where did I make the comments you ascribe to me in your above. You'll note that my comment is around the "FACT" that the Canon 300mm is a fixed focal length as opposed to the infinite range the Sigma lens has between 120mm and 300mm. So to post a comment about a totally different lens, is lame in my book. Nobody needs to own the lens in question to recognize the difference in the two lenses.

I think I see an ego out of joint here.

I don't own the 120-300mm but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that a 300mm prime doesn't have the ability to take an image at anything but it's only focal length. I guess you missed all my smiley faces in my comments.

I do own a three lenses by Sigme; 100-300mm f/4.0, 15-30mm f/3.5-4.5 and the 180mm f/3.5 macro. I'm happy with all three. I'm also, based upon my experience, considering getting Sigma's 300-800mm f/5.6 zoom.

Sigma makes kick butt glass that just happens to be kicking Canon's fanny and doing so at half the cost. I have some six Canon lenses, three that are "L" glass, one that's a 300mm f/4.0L, so I do have some experience in which to base my comments on.
 
David Perkins said:
Any suggestions on where to get the best price on the Sigma
120-300/2.8 EX.
Click to expand...
Hi!

Unfortunately I can't tell you where to get it cheap (it's about € 3,000 here in the EC), but in light of this typically heated discussion going on in this thread I would like to offer my opinion.

I've had this zoom for about two months now and it is clearly my favourite lens. The optics are outstanding on any account. I would gladly pitch it against any prime in a shootout, any day. If people here take for granted that a 300/2.8 prime delivers better image quality I can only suggest: think again. Try the Sigma, which is the newer design and a brilliant showcase for an independant lens manufacturer on the rise. It also has the fastest AF of any lens w/ Canon mount I own or have ever tried. I works brilliantly with the Sigma 1.4x Apo converter.

The zoom ring may be stiff in the beginning (perhaps some more than others) but it will smoothen somewhat with extended use. I personally like that this zoom ring is extremely wide, has a good surface to grip and is placed towards the middle of the lens (in front of the focus-ring, quite unusual) where it doesn't get in the way when used on a monopod.

About the only downside I can see is the undeniable fact that this is one big, heavy mother of a lens. I find it impossible to use without tri- or monopod for any amount of time.

And, yes, Sigma do have a problem with batch variation. Out of the three samples I've personally seen, one's image was slightly soft on the left side of the frame. As always with Sigma - buy three, keep one.
I can't see how anyone would regret buying this lens - I sure don't!

Greetings
Stefan
 
I see we gotten to the real bottom line here is what you really object to is that someone would post that the Sigma 120-300mm 2.8 might be a lens to avoid. It appears that its finally coming out in this thread that you are an avid Sigma fan. Good for you. What you missed in the fact that I have stated twice that the 120-300 Sigma has too stiff of a focus ring to make it very usable as a zoom if you shoot sports or high speed moving objects. Let me make is simpler for you. Even though the 120-300mm Sigma 2.8 is a zoom, the focus ring is so stiff, you might as well buy a prime, be it a Sigma prime, Canon prime, or someone else. The fact is the stiffness of the zoom ring on the Sigma negated the use of its zoom range for me. I am glad you like glass, but its moronic for you to comment on how any lens performs at any focal length if you have never owned it or used it. Sure its a given that the Sigma 120-300mm has different focal lengths when compared to a prime, but its a useless zoom if the zoom ring is so stiff it makes it impossible to use. Sigma does make some nice glass and I am glad you like it. All three of my experiences with Sigma glass on my 1D have been less than satisfying. If if Sigma works for you then great, buy it! My experience has shown me that I am personally better off to stay with Canon glass. As far as Sigma kicking Canon's butt, you can debate that all day long. My final comment is that you get what you pay for.

Best regards
Jason
Thomas Gardner said:
Jason Stoller said:
Funny, I owned the Sigma lens and I just stated my opinion in
regard to it and explained what I did personally. Since you are
commenting on how good you think the Sigma 120-300 2.8 is at
different focal lengths, I am sure you have personal experience in
regard to this! So why don't you post some pictures from your
Sigma 120-300 if you even have one and help the original poster
make a good decision.
Click to expand...
Where did I make the comments you ascribe to me in your above.
You'll note that my comment is around the "FACT" that the Canon
300mm is a fixed focal length as opposed to the infinite range the
Sigma lens has between 120mm and 300mm. So to post a comment about
a totally different lens, is lame in my book. Nobody needs to own
the lens in question to recognize the difference in the two lenses.

I think I see an ego out of joint here.

I don't own the 120-300mm but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to
know that a 300mm prime doesn't have the ability to take an image
at anything but it's only focal length. I guess you missed all my
smiley faces in my comments.

I do own a three lenses by Sigme; 100-300mm f/4.0, 15-30mm
f/3.5-4.5 and the 180mm f/3.5 macro. I'm happy with all three.
I'm also, based upon my experience, considering getting Sigma's
300-800mm f/5.6 zoom.

Sigma makes kick butt glass that just happens to be kicking Canon's
fanny and doing so at half the cost. I have some six Canon lenses,
three that are "L" glass, one that's a 300mm f/4.0L, so I do have
some experience in which to base my comments on.
Click to expand...
--
Jason Stoller [email protected]

We are just Beta Testers who pay the Camera Companies to test their new products!
 
David,

To answer your question: I got a very good price at B&H. In the meantime, it may have come down elsewhere.

In answer to the others: Jason posted his comments early on, and I think they were valid at the time and for what he does. He made it very clear that this was his personal issue. If I recall, he was the first user to post comments with this lens in any of the forums.

I have had the lens now for about two months. It is outstanding in every way. Sharpness is excellent except wide open, where I would say it is very good. Color seems a bit warm, but with the SD9, that is not something I can state clearly as solely related to the lens. It is large and heavy but can be hand held if there is sufficient light. Other wise it requires a soldi tripod. The issues related to the mount and lens cover are valid but can be adjusted to. Specifically, I did not find the stiffness mentioned by Jason to be a problem. It is possible he had a bad copy or that this does not bother me.

No zoom ever has resolved better than a prime within its range when both have equal f-stops and similar build. However, at least in the case of the SD9, no lens - prime or zoom - resolves higher than the high resolution of this chip. As I understand it, the D60, 10D camera family requires greater lens resolution. Do a search on comments by Kok Chen and lens sharpness to better understand this point.

Samples are in the links below.

Laurence

--
Gone Alinghi

--------------------
Final Standings
Alinghi 5

http://www.pbase.com/lmatson/sd9_images
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/user_home
 
Sorry Stefan, not a gross example, but the exact truth in my case. In the past I have attempted to try 2 different copies of the 17-35 Sigma with poor results. The lenses hunted and would not settle down on the 1D. I am not the only one in this forum that has experienced this with Sigma lenses. My posts above are a factual record of my attempt with the Sigma 120-300 2.8 I attempted to work with it for over a 1 1/2 months on a daily basis. Many users and fans of Sigma have stated in this forum that you might have to exchange a specific model of a lens as many as 3 times to get a good copy and there are quality control issues that exist. With that being said, then why discount my findings? Again in my opinion the zoom ring on my copy was so stiff it made the use of zoom with this lens worthless for me. Your experience could be different, but I personally do not have time to keep exchanging lenses in hopes to get a good copy of one. I will also follow up by saying that all manufacturers have some lenses that hit the market, that have a quaility control issue or are just not up to standard. A Canon example might be the 24-70 that some are having difficulty here that have been noted in this forum. So no manufacturer is perfect, but please do not discount what I have stated or anyone else has stated in regard to their findings in regard to a particular lens. Your findings are yours, and my findiings are mine. Personally my findings have indicated a quality control problem exists within the Sigma line and to deny that it does would just be misleading. Also if the zoom ring was going to loosen up over time with the Sigma 120-300, then it would have done so in a months time. I really hope others have better luck with this lens than I did because we could really use a good lens in this focal length, esp one with IS.

Best regards

Jason
Stefan Schott said:
Jason Stoller said:
its a useless zoom if the zoom ring is so stiff it makes it
impossible to use.
Click to expand...
That would be a gross exaggeration for all three samples of the
Sigma I've used.

Greetings
Stefan
Click to expand...
--
Jason Stoller [email protected]

We are just Beta Testers who pay the Camera Companies to test their new products!
 
Jason Stoller said:
I see we gotten to the real bottom line here is what you really
object to is that someone would post that the Sigma 120-300mm 2.8
might be a lens to avoid.
Click to expand...
No that's not the bottom line. The bottom line is a 300mm can't be compared against a fixed focal length. Where do you get this psyco babble from?
Jason Stoller said:
It appears that its finally coming out
in this thread that you are an avid Sigma fan.
Click to expand...
No. I'm a fan of the best glass possible and I don't have favorites. I have Canon, Sigma and Tamron glass. My next lens will be a Canon lens. I just haven't decided if it will be the 20mm or 24mm. Are you making this stuff up as you write?
Jason Stoller said:
Good for you. What
you missed in the fact that I have stated twice that the 120-300
Sigma has too stiff of a focus ring to make it very usable as a
zoom if you shoot sports or high speed moving objects.
Click to expand...
Okay, you're weak in the wrist, that's not my fault and I won't hold it as a fault against you.
Jason Stoller said:
Let me make
is simpler for you.
Click to expand...
Oh no. Please, keep it complicated so I'll have an excuse not to understand what you're trying to explain to me:-)
Jason Stoller said:
Even though the 120-300mm Sigma 2.8 is a zoom,
the focus ring is so stiff, you might as well buy a prime, be it a
Sigma prime, Canon prime, or someone else.
Click to expand...
Go pound some nails with a twenty-eight ounce hammer. Sixteen penny nails. It does wonder for your forearm strength which is where you get your wrist strength. Do about eight hours a day for twenty years, you'll quit your complaining about weak wrists:-)

Maybe the lens has a stiff zoom but there are people here that whine about five pounds of glass and camera like it's five hundred pounds. I bet you're complaining to much about this stiff ring and don't realize that you're approaching the twist of the wrist from the wrong direction. You're the first I've read about that is unhappy with the amount of force necessary to twist a zoom ring.

Now that being said, what does any of this have to do with a 300mm lens trying to get a shot at 200mm.
Jason Stoller said:
The fact is the
stiffness of the zoom ring on the Sigma negated the use of its zoom
range for me. I am glad you like glass, but its moronic for you to
comment on how any lens performs at any focal length if you have
never owned it or used it.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I have a 100-300mm f/4.0 and a 300mm f/4.0. I consider that sufficent for my needs. If I had need of a 120-300mm f/2.8, I wouldn't hesitate, based upon past experience and your comments to get Sigma's 120-300mm f/2.8 zoom.
Jason Stoller said:
Sure its a given that the Sigma
120-300mm has different focal lengths when compared to a prime, but
its a useless zoom if the zoom ring is so stiff it makes it
impossible to use.
Click to expand...
I agree. A TV that doesn't work right out of the box is useless also. Have you returned the glass to whom you bought it from? Have you sent it in to Sigma to have the tensioning bands adjusted? These are alturnatives that should be explored.
Jason Stoller said:
Sigma does make some nice glass and I am glad
you like it. All three of my experiences with Sigma glass on my 1D
have been less than satisfying.
Click to expand...
Which I'm sorry to read because money is always a consideration unless you're filthy rich, which I'm not.
Jason Stoller said:
If if Sigma works for you then
great, buy it!
Click to expand...
Cool!
Jason Stoller said:
My experience has shown me that I am personally
better off to stay with Canon glass.
Click to expand...
We all gotta go with what works for us.
Jason Stoller said:
As far as Sigma kicking
Canon's butt, you can debate that all day long.
Click to expand...
The facts are on the table so there's no debate. All companies put out bad products and that too is a fact. I currently seem to be getting everybody's bad HD's. Just had to swap a bad one out and spin up the backup drive.
Jason Stoller said:
My final comment
is that you get what you pay for.
Click to expand...
Said in a sideways, side of the mouth comment like; if you want to buy cheap, you're gonna get cheap but if you want to buy quality, then you better get Canon. If you're going to insult someone, do it to their face.

I got what I paid for, high quality glass at an excellent price.

Here's my latest image. Check out the color of the blue of the flame.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1349693&size=lg

It was capture with a D30 and a Sigma 180mm f/3.5 macro. Color was balanced to tungsten on the CWB. ISO 1600, hence the grainy look.

Send you lens in, get the tension bands adjusted. The 120-300mm f/2.8 is a killer lens. Canon doesn't even have a lens like the one you have. Either that or get a 100-300mm f/4.0, since you're shooting out doors sports, during the day or evening (ISO 400-800) you'll have plenty of light. Canon doesn't have an equivalent of this lens either. The best Canon has is the 100-400, which as you know is a very slow lens. The only benny of the 100-400mm by Canon is the IS.

Sigma is kicking Canon's fanny and I'm a big fan of this fact because it puts, rightfully so, pricing/feature pressure on Canon where there wasn't any before.

If anybody were to jam me about using Sigma glass, I'd just sneer at them and tell them that it's their money to waste, not mine.
Jason Stoller said:
Best regards
Jason
Click to expand...
And wishing you the best with your argumentative lens.
Jason Stoller said:
Jason Stoller [email protected]
We are just Beta Testers who pay the Camera Companies to test their
new products!
Click to expand...
Still testing the D30 for Canon:-)
 
Jason Stoller said:
Sorry Stefan, not a gross example, but the exact truth in my case.
Click to expand...
Did I ever deny that?
Jason Stoller said:
In the past I have attempted to try 2 different copies of the 17-35
Sigma with poor results.
Click to expand...
We're not talking about the 17-35 here.
Jason Stoller said:
With
that being said, then why discount my findings?
Click to expand...
I didn't. I was talking about the three 120-300's I personally sampled.
Jason Stoller said:
but please do not discount what I have
stated or anyone else has stated
Click to expand...
I didn't. I was talking about the three 120-300's I personally sampled.
Jason Stoller said:
we could really use a good
lens in this focal length,
Click to expand...
We already have. At least I do.
Jason Stoller said:
esp one with IS.
Click to expand...
I have no use whatsoever for IS. But that's me.

Regards
Stefan
Jason Stoller said:
Stefan Schott said:
Jason Stoller said:
its a useless zoom if the zoom ring is so stiff it makes it
impossible to use.
Click to expand...
That would be a gross exaggeration for all three samples of the
Sigma I've used.

Greetings
Stefan
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Stefan,

Have you had problem with the zoom ring being really stiff.

Thanks,
David
Stefan Schott said:
David Perkins said:
Any suggestions on where to get the best price on the Sigma
120-300/2.8 EX.
Click to expand...
Hi!

Unfortunately I can't tell you where to get it cheap (it's about €
3,000 here in the EC), but in light of this typically heated
discussion going on in this thread I would like to offer my opinion.
I've had this zoom for about two months now and it is clearly my
favourite lens. The optics are outstanding on any account. I would
gladly pitch it against any prime in a shootout, any day. If people
here take for granted that a 300/2.8 prime delivers better image
quality I can only suggest: think again. Try the Sigma, which is
the newer design and a brilliant showcase for an independant lens
manufacturer on the rise. It also has the fastest AF of any lens w/
Canon mount I own or have ever tried. I works brilliantly with the
Sigma 1.4x Apo converter.
The zoom ring may be stiff in the beginning (perhaps some more than
others) but it will smoothen somewhat with extended use. I
personally like that this zoom ring is extremely wide, has a good
surface to grip and is placed towards the middle of the lens (in
front of the focus-ring, quite unusual) where it doesn't get in the
way when used on a monopod.
About the only downside I can see is the undeniable fact that this
is one big, heavy mother of a lens. I find it impossible to use
without tri- or monopod for any amount of time.
And, yes, Sigma do have a problem with batch variation. Out of the
three samples I've personally seen, one's image was slightly soft
on the left side of the frame. As always with Sigma - buy three,
keep one.
I can't see how anyone would regret buying this lens - I sure don't!

Greetings
Stefan
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/perkinsd
http://www.perkins-photo.com
 
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