Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Sports & Action Photos

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 19, 2006, 6:13 PM   #1
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Well, I just got a new Sigma 120-300. So, rather than shoot eye charts, license plates or brick walls, I decided to test the lens the old fashioned way - actually taking photographs...

The focusing is a bit stiff, so I'll have to get used to that. Colors are good, and when it hits I get some great results. Unfortunately I was testing it out on Lacrosse which I'm new at so a lot of user error rejects. So far the one area for concern is noticable CA - but I was also using a 1.4x TC. I'll have another chance to test it out in another week or so - we'll see how it does the second time around.

In the mean time, C&C for these shots is always appreciated.

John












JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 23, 2006, 11:28 AM   #2
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

Hey John....... nice lens, that sure is a toy I would like in my case!!!!

For a first attempt these are looking very good. It must be wonderful to have a fast lens with such good range (420mm @ f4 with the TC).

Looking forward to seeing more of the results from this baby.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2006, 11:48 AM   #3
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Mark1616 wrote:
Quote:
It must be wonderful to have a fast lens with such good range (420mm @ f4 with the TC).

Looking forward to seeing more of the results from this baby.
Thanks Mark. I've been chomping at the bit to get out again but spring sports around me really doesn't kick off until the weekend of April 1. I'll be able to test this baby out on baseball, softball and track then. These were taken about 200 miles from home - I was out of town visitng my sister's family. My wife and sister went to the mall and I snuck out to the local parks / high schools and came across this match.

I'll be very interested to get some more real life work with this lens to see if the CA is going to be an issue for me or not. But, the bokeh is such a wonderful thing - still not the buttery smooth bokeh of the 400mm 2.8 (but I don't have $6500 to spend).

With any luck I'll have some more lacrosse this Sunday (some martial arts stuff too from Saturday depending on the lighting). But in another week the floodgates really open up
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2006, 3:22 PM   #4
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

Nice....... should be good. I have just ordered a 2x Converter for my Sigma 70-200 2.8 to see what that is like as a 140-400 f5.6, I am trying to keep a realistic head about it, but will be interested to see the results. Roll on the warmer weather!!!

How bad is the CA (chromic aberration- for those new to photography) in realistic terms, have you got a 100% crop that shows this?
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2006, 4:23 PM   #5
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Here is an example of the CA:

Original Pic:



100% crop:


JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2006, 5:20 PM   #6
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

I was about to say that it was not looking bad at all then spotted it. Yes that is a bit of a pain. Did you get any shots without the 1.4x TC? Does that reduce the CA? Have you tried to remove it with filters in Photoshop/PSP?
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2006, 5:22 PM   #7
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Mark -the soccer shot was a shot WITHOUT the tc. So, it's not just the TC. I'm trying to beat the bushes on other forums that have sports shooters that use this lens to see if it's common for this lens or if it's my copy.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2006, 5:45 PM   #8
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

I would have thought that it would be well know if a lens of that cost had problems like that as standard. I don't get anything with the 70-200 and that is less than half the price. It's annoying that I can't even get this lens for my camera, Sigma don't seem to be making all of them for the Minolta body which is a pain!!! I will be interested to know what you find out from the other forums.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:18 AM.