Sigma 300mm F2.8 on Canon 5D

[Kevin_B1]

Has anyone got any experience using the Sigma 300mm F2.8 lens (not the DG model) as there is a new one for sale at a very good price and I am looking for some feedback on it. Canon 300mm would be the preference but can not justify that but the Sigma can be had for a third of the price, I would be using it on a 5D and 20D with and without x1.4 converter.
That leads to another question would the Canon x1.4 converter fit or would it have to be the Sigma converter?

Thanks for any help you can give me on this as even as it is only a third of the price it is still £1000+ I am spending and can not afford to make a mistake?

Regards

Kevin

[Daniel Harrison]

well I don't know specifically about the 300mm but I do have 2 sigmas and I would like to throw in a word of warning

Firstly sigma make some very sharp lenses. for instance my 70-200mm f/2.8 BUT make sure that if you buy this you are willing to get it calibrated to your body becuase it will most likely need doing. BOTH my sigmas are in for calibration at the moment and I have to say that sigma have been more than good about it.

And get it calibrated to YOUR camera. If the lens is "in specs" it is meaningless. both my lenses were "in specs" but on my canon 1D AF the 70-200 was terrible. So you may need to factor in the time to lend them your lens and body for calibration. Of course it may work just fine off the bat and you will have no problems.

I bet the 300 is a fine lens and very sharp. Check out the reviews at Fred Miranda.

Daniel

[Ger Bee]

The Sigma 300mm ƒ2.8 is a fine lens, well built and sharp.

I was looking for a sports lens recently and eventually settled on the Canon as there is no comparison in performance, AF speed, AF acquisition, Servo Tracking, AF accuracy, smoothness and silence in operation. Plus, only the Canon lens showed the minimal image degradation with converters.

A side note on the converters, if buying a Canon, buy Canon converters, if not then Kenko is the next best, but the Sigma should do fine also.

The Sigma is a very tempting lens, when I was looking there were going for 2/3rd of the Canon price, so they can be really cheap from time to time.

[Kevin_B1]

Decided aginst the Sigma 300mm F2.8 and purchased the Canon 400mm L F5.6 should get it on Tuesday, so will be out giving it a trial run next week.
Anything special to watch out for, I have used the Canon 100-400 a lot so hopefully no different to use just sharper.

Regards

Kevin

[Andreas Kanon]

Great choice Kevin, i use the 400 f5.6 as of late when i switched over to Canon from using Sigma 120-300 f2.8 on my Nikon.
The 400 f5.6 is an amazing lens when you think about it.
Sure it's a 5.6 but i just dial in ISO400 and shoot handheld with little or no problems.

Also the 400 is sharp, even with a 1.4 converter it is very sharp and since i have a 1d mark2N house i still have AF at f8 so it is a very cheap way to get long reach and great quality.

[Gary Ayala]

I shoot a lot of sports and I almost purchased the Sigma 120-300 2.8. This lens has been rated as sharper than the prime 300. In my research, even Sigma reps stated that the zoom had greater resolution. So, if it was my money I'd get the Sigma 120-300 2.8 ... check it out.

[Andreas Kanon]

This picture is with a Nikon D70 , Sigma 120-300 f2.8 and a Sigma 2x TC and tripod just to give you an idea.

http://www.kanonphoto.com/gallery/galleries/waterfowl/images/Horned-Grebe.jpg