Sigma 300mm f2.8 (1 Viewer)

Vectis Birder · Jan 15, 2011

I have the Canon 400mm f5.6 lens but want something longer. There's no way I can ever afford a Canon 500mm f4, not at the frightening £5000+ these things retail for, but I have seen some good sharp shots from the Sigma 300mm f2.8 with a 2x converter. An f2.8 would also allow AF on my 7D and 40D. Because of this and because the Sigma, while still pretty costly at around £2k, has a less hideous price tag than the Canon 300mm f2.8 or the Canon 500mm, I am considering saving up and getting one.
Another reason for looking at the Sigma is because I also want a 300mm lens and while the Canon f4 version is a good lens, I'd like a faster one, so I can put a 2x converter on when I want it and still get autofocus plus keeping a reasonable amount of light.

Has anyone here had any experience with the Sigma 300 f2.8 and, if so, what did you think?

Keith Reeder · Jan 15, 2011

Not really answering your question, but you can get the Canon for a lot less than £5K if you can pluck up the courage to buy from Hong Kong, Fay.

I must admit that I'd want IS on a 300mm f/2.8 so saving a bit longer for the Canon would be my suggestion.

A while ago Nigel Blake kindly took some 300mm + 2x shots for me to get an idea of sharpness and - as you can see - the results were amazing.

So, optically great thought the Sigma appears to be, I'd tough it out for the Canon myself.

Vectis Birder · Jan 15, 2011

Those pictures from Nigel - wow. :eek!: :t:

Thanks Keith.

I'd have to see how the saving goes first before making a decision either way, I've not got off the mark yet.

TobyH · Jan 15, 2011

I used to use one of these with a Nikon D300, using solo or with converters. I did write a bit of an opinion on it (favourable) on my site (link is below)

If you look at my bird galleries (Gallery 2 mainly has older shots) many of the images are taken with that lens and a converter, check the info on the images for Kit used. Make sure you use the image controls to viewe them at their full size 1200px

I used it as a stepping stone to getting a 500mm and didn't regret it for a second.

TobyH

Vectis Birder · Jan 15, 2011

Thanks Toby, I'll go and take a look.

(Later) Looks good and the sort of thing I am after. Lovely website, by the way :t:

Keith, I'd prefer the Canon over the Sigma but theres a nearly £5000 price difference (UK) and, at the risk of sounding like a coward, I really really don't trust Ebay. A couple of friends of mine have been stung there and lost thousands. My problem is that I am in a low paid job (I'm a temp) and saving's not easy. Canon's prices are horrendous (and I don't think Nikon are any better) so third party lenses might have to be the way to go for me for fast lenses and super telephotos unless my luck on the job front changes for the better (looking for permanent work) or I turn to crime

I can't see that changing.

a.dancy · Jan 15, 2011

I have commented on the Sigma 300f2.8 several times before. I try to be as objective as possible. It is a good solid lens and lighter than the Canon. The focusing is lightning fast but this attribute is impeded by there being no focus limiter. To me when using converters for birds in flight this is a real bummer. I would rather a focus limiter than have IS which again the Sigma does not have. However when locked the focus is extremely responsive and tracks exceedingly well.

The Canon 300f2.8 may be one of the sharpest in the pack , if not the sharpest of ' L ' grade lenses but if Canon made the Sigma I have no doubt it would be graded as an 'L' lens...it is razor sharp but is not as sharp as the Canon. The difference is small. In short the image quality is superb.

It performs well with a 1.4X converter and not so well with a 2X converter for image quality. Having said that I have seen some ropey shots taken with the Canon 300f2.8 plus 2X converter but also I have taken some cracking shots using a 2X converter. I recall doing dotterel a couple of years ago in the most dreadful light and my shots stand up against anyones.

The images below are full frame using 2X converter, unsharpened and my camera is set to no sharpening. The only processing applied is contrast to the Kentish plover image since my camera is set to -1 contrast

Vectis Birder · Jan 15, 2011

Thanks for the comments a.dancy. It sounds as if, although it's not quite in the same league as the Canon - and given the price difference that's not surprising - it is still well worth getting. I've also looked through your gallery on here and you have some stunning shots with this lens and the 500mm.

Keith Reeder · Jan 15, 2011

Vectis Birder said:
I really really don't trust Ebay.

Ignore the "Ebay" aspect of the link, Fay: DigitalRev is a highly trusted Hong Kong retailer - umpteen mentions of them on this site, and I'd trust them over some UK-based retailers.

Vectis Birder · Jan 15, 2011

Cheers Keith. I trust your judgement and that of other regulars here so when I have eventually saved enough money (for any f2.8 lens!), I'll bare them in mind.

Keith Reeder · Jan 15, 2011

When I get enough pennies together for a Canon 300mm f/2.8 I'll be buying mine from DigitalRev..!

a.dancy · Jan 15, 2011

Vectis Birder said:
Thanks for the comments a.dancy. It sounds as if, although it's not quite in the same league as the Canon - and given the price difference that's not surprising - it is still well worth getting. I've also looked through your gallery on here and you have some stunning shots with this lens and the 500mm.

Thanks

You get very good bang for your buck with the Sigma but since you have a sharp lens already I don't know if lashing out is going to benefit you much. If you need the reach and think you will have a 2X converter on most of the time then by all means , if you can , get a Canon 300f2.8 or even the Sigma 500f4.5. Just to throw a spanner into the works you can consider the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 which according to Sigma and their charts is sharper than the prime. The newer versions have better coatings which should in theory reduce flare. You then have all the benefits that zoom offers. Also look at the gallery of 'mike from ebbw'...stunning...using Sigma 50-500 zoom. Clearly getting close make a difference.

http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=38123

Meanwhile a couple more shots...sadly my procesing skills are not up with Keith Reeder or Nigel Blake's but I happen to like these shots of a goat herder's dog again taken using 2X converter and exposure pushed by about 1.5 stops for shutter speed in last light. I do not use layers or neat image (I should) my pictures are pretty much what you get on the plate. Both full frame.

Keith Reeder · Jan 16, 2011

Nowt wrong with them, Adrian - they're cracking, and they provide very compelling evidence of the potential of the Sigma with a 2x.

Why they don't do that lens with OS is a mystery to me - I'd have one in a heartbeat if they did...

Vectis Birder · Jan 16, 2011

a.dancy said:
Thanks

You get very good bang for your buck with the Sigma but since you have a sharp lens already I don't know if lashing out is going to benefit you much. If you need the reach and think you will have a 2X converter on most of the time then by all means , if you can , get a Canon 300f2.8 or even the Sigma 500f4.5. Just to throw a spanner into the works you can consider the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 which according to Sigma and their charts is sharper than the prime. The newer versions have better coatings which should in theory reduce flare. You then have all the benefits that zoom offers. Also look at the gallery of 'mike from ebbw'...stunning...using Sigma 50-500 zoom. Clearly getting close make a difference.

http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=38123

Meanwhile a couple more shots...sadly my procesing skills are not up with Keith Reeder or Nigel Blake's but I happen to like these shots of a goat herder's dog again taken using 2X converter and exposure pushed by about 1.5 stops for shutter speed in last light. I do not use layers or neat image (I should) my pictures are pretty much what you get on the plate. Both full frame.

Those pictures of the dog are lovely and, as Keith says, compelling evidence in favour of the Sigma. Lack of OS doesn't bother me too much, I have coped well enough without stabilisation thus far and if light levels are low I tend to use a monopod or tripod anyway.

I am also thinking about the Sigma 500mm prime - the Canon one's well out of my financial reach, barring a lottery win, and if Canon prices go up again as they are rumoured to do it will become even more so. The Sigma one's still expensive but £2k less; £3k seems more achievable than £5k. The Canon one may be a smidge better but that's no good if it's financially unreachable.
However, I'd like a 300mm - my current lens line up consists of a Canon 70-200mm f4 L and 400mm f5.6 L - and I was thinking how versatile a fast 300mm prime would be with a 2x converter, which led me to considering the Sigma.

However, once I have saved enough money, I'll also look for secondhand Canons, although (unfortunately from the buyer's point of view) lenses don't tend to lose their value like cameras do.

Roy C · Jan 16, 2011

I have never tried the Sigma 300/2.8 so cannot comment other than to say that the lack of a focus limiter would be a real 'biggy' for me. I often use the Canon 300/2.8 with a 2x tc and the AF speed can be fairly slow if not using a focus limiter, when the bird is roughly in focus then it is no problem but when it is not then the focus goes right out to infinity, back the the shortest focus distance and then out again until focus is achieved (by which time the bird could be gone!!!!). Setting the focus limiter (I mostly use 6.4m to Infinity) speeds up AF no end with a 2x tc and in reasonable light I would say that it is even faster than some bare lenses, even BIF are possible.
AF speed with a 1.4tc is not an issue and you lose very little from the bare lens (which Canon rate as one of their fastest focusing teles). See my sig below for 300/2.8 + 2x tc samples (BTW a good used copy of the Canon 300/2.8 goes for around £2.5 k)

Vectis Birder · Jan 26, 2011

Thanks for the info Roy (sorry about not getting back sooner, I had forgotten about this thread!). Your pictures are fabulous, the quality is superb and certainly "sells" the Canon to me.
I use the focus limiter on my 400mm f5.6 and it does make life easier. However, the lack of one wouldn't be a deal-breaker for me.

I made a mistake about the Canon 300mm f2.8 when I said there was a nearly £5-grand price difference in an earlier post on here. I've just realised I'd seen the price of the Mark II which is listed on Warehouse Express, but as far as I know not yet released, rather than the much less-expensive current model.

Roy C · Jan 26, 2011

Vectis Birder said:
I use the focus limiter on my 400mm f5.6 and it does make life easier. However, the lack of one wouldn't be a deal-breaker for me.

To be quite honest I rarely if ever bothered to use it with the 400/5.6 as I did not find it made much difference.
It is only when I shoot the 300/2.8 with a 2x tc that I would really miss a focus limiter - it really does speed up the AF no end (with the bare lens or with a 1.4x tc I do not bother about the limiter). Certainly with a Canon 300/2.8 if shooting at 600mm the lack of a focus limiter would very much be a deal breaker for me but maybe the Sigma is faster focussing.

Vectis Birder · Jan 26, 2011

Thanks Roy.

Jaff · Jan 26, 2011

I'm not sure if it's been mentioned but all big canon tele's have two-stage limiters. With the 300mmf2.8 you get 2.8m-infin, 2.8-6.4m and 6.4m-infin. So if you're doing close-up work like at a feeding station the AF is instantaneous with the middle one (even with 2x). Of course make sure everything is within 6.4m first though.

The IS of the Canon is quite an importan factor when using the 2x too, makes it a lot easier to hand-hold and still get sharp shots.

Vectis Birder · Jan 27, 2011

None of my current lenses have IS and I have always got on without it just fine. I'd quite like IS on my next big lens purchase, although it's not a big deal if I don't have IS. 600mm is too big to hand hold, although I use a monopod or tripod if I need to.

Roy C · Jan 27, 2011

Vectis Birder said:
None of my current lenses have IS and I have always got on without it just fine. I'd quite like IS on my next big lens purchase, although it's not a big deal if I don't have IS. 600mm is too big to hand hold, although I use a monopod or tripod if I need to.

Even when using on a sturdy tripod Fay, Canon recommend that you still you use I.S. if the lens is tripod sensing. I always use I.S. even when shooting on a good tripod and gimbal head - the longer the focal length then the more you can do with every aid possible to reduce vibrations and mirror slap IMO.

Sigma 300mm f2.8 (1 Viewer)

Itchy feet

Watch the birdie...

Itchy feet

Well-known member

Itchy feet

Registered User

Attachments

Itchy feet

Watch the birdie...

Itchy feet

Watch the birdie...

Registered User

Attachments

Watch the birdie...

Itchy feet

Occasional bird snapper

Itchy feet

Occasional bird snapper

Itchy feet

Registered Member

Itchy feet

Occasional bird snapper

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread