Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 23, 2004, 8:26 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 165
Default

I'd just like to get some input from those of you who have this lens or have used it.

Thanks,
Andy
aaltenburger is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 23, 2004, 9:59 AM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

I hesitated between this lens and the 50-500mm last year, and went for the 50-500mm because it made more $ sense. Anyway I always want an a 300mm f/2.8 and it will probably be next...

FYI http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/s...rt=7&thecat=29
http://www.photographyreview.com/psc...x.aspx#reviews
http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/browse?id=21475
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 2004, 12:30 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 165
Default

NHL, well, you're the one that's making me consider this lens. For shooting football and baseball, this lens would give me an extra 200mm w/ my 2x TC. Since I'm shooting just sports, I'm not really getting any benefit from the IS aspect of my Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS/USM. Tempted to pick up a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 for indoor sports in the fall.
aaltenburger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 29, 2004, 7:37 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1
Default

My nephew has this lens and it is awsome!
brez1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2004, 2:10 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 577
Default

aaltenburger wrote:
Quote:
... Since I'm shooting just sports, I'm not really getting any benefit from the IS aspect of my Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS/USM. ...
Not true, in IS mode 2 you can pan and still benefit from the IS stabilizing movement perpendicular to your panning!

Barthold
barthold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2004, 6:02 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 10
Default

I've been shooting youth soccer outdoors with this lens for the past few weeks *onloan* from a local shop. My closest comparison lens is the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM, not for reach or versatility, but for photo quality and other values relative to action photography.

First, there's little if any difference in sharpness shooting wide open in varying light at speeds of 1/500th and up b/w the Sigma and Canon. It's true, although maybe a bit hard to believe until you see it. The HSM is slightly slower than the Canon's USM, but that is relative to the truly amazing speed of the Canon. The Sigma is plenty fast for me.

My own choice is between the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 with a 1.4x TC vs the Sigma EX 120-300mm f/2.8. Basically, I gainversatility with the Canon and lose an f-stop. With the Sigma I keep the f-stop but lose the versatility of the Canon lens.

I want both, but have the cash to do only one now.

The Sigma is a very fine lens in an interesting size - you won't be disappointed in it, I believe. I'll probably keep the Sigma EX for now and save for the Canon. Or the reverse, although I'll know I'll really regret losing the f-stop when I get indoors over the winter. No, it's the Sigma for now ... whew, this is tuff.

IMHO, the f/2.8 is quite necessary for sports work unless you know you'll be in great light most of the time. It's very easy to find yourself under cloud cover or in shade and unable to expose at 1/500th and up - which is necessary to freeze cleanly. That's where the extra f-stop is valuable. Also, minimum reach for most field sports outdoors is 300mm, and 400m+ is better, but financially out of reach for me at a fixed f/2.8.
MCTuomey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2004, 7:00 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 16
Default

I have this lens in Nikon mount. It is an incredible lens. Extremely sharp and fast focusing. The zoom is a huge advantage especially when shooting ice hockey. I previously used a prime 300/2.8 and you would lose much of the ice near you. WIth the 120-300 I can cover virtually the entire ice surface. The same can be said when shooting football or soccer outside, you don't lose the player when they get closer to you.

It is also very nice with the 1.4, I would avoid the 2x unless it is extremely bright out. You lose some sharpness and would not go bigger than 5x7 when you use the 2x, the biggest problem is loss of focusing speed. This is not true of the 1.4, almost no loss of speed or sharpness.

I am very happy with this lens.

Mike
Dervical 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 1:10 PM.