used 300 f2.8 IS or new sigma 120-300 f2.8

Sort by date Sort by votes
D

dash2k8

Dec 21, 2010
217
12
6,313
#1
Hi guys, I saw a used Canon 300mm f/2.8 IS (mark I) going for $3500. The Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 (new S version) is slightly cheaper. I need the 300mm reach at f2.8 (already have a 70-200mm f2.8, but with TC it becomes f4) so the ability to zoom on the Sigma doesn't really matter.

The Canon is older but the image quality is obviously a little better being a prime.
The Sigma is newer and will save me some money, but there's a little bit less sharpness at the edges. (Vignetting can be corrected in post so I don't mind that.)

I regularly print medium-sized prints (anywhere between A3+ to A2) so IQ is somewhat important (most regular clients can't tell the difference, they just like bright colors and great expressions). I guess the main question is, should I pay more for an OLD lens with slightly better IQ, or should I pay less for a newer lens and suffer a tad in IQ? Am I paying $500 more for a $20 difference in visual results? Thanks guys!
 
#6
dash2k8 said:
ichetov said:
Go for 300MkI. I tried both, and there is quite a bit extra IQ from the Canon. The difference is even more pronounced with 1.4x extender...
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply and suggestion. I will go for the Canon model. :)
Click to expand...

I have one myself - you won't regret this decision.
I often use mine with a Canon 2 x Mk3 extender, whist it is not as good as a 600 F4, it makes a very portable and high quality 600mm.
 
Upvote 0
#7
Mind if I throw in a curve ball into the mix? I've been thinking about a 200L f2. Which is a 280 f2.8... and a 400 f4...with extenders.

I too have thought about the 300mm, but the 200 seems more flexible with the added stop. Thoughts?
 
Upvote 0
#8
jdramirez said:
Mind if I throw in a curve ball into the mix? I've been thinking about a 200L f2. Which is a 280 f2.8... and a 400 f4...with extenders.

I too have thought about the 300mm, but the 200 seems more flexible with the added stop. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Size, weight and cost are about same between the two. Which is more important for you JD - reach or 1stop extra. Although I haven't try 200mm f2 with x1.4 yet, but I have feeling it can't win the bare 300mm f2.8 IS II in term of IQ.

I can do some test shots and share with you on 200mm f2 + 1.4x TC III later this week ;)
 
Upvote 0
#9
Dylan777 said:
Although I haven't try 200mm f2 with x1.4 yet, but I have feeling it can't win the bare 300mm f2.8 IS II in term of IQ.
Click to expand...

TDP agrees with you:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=739&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=458&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

Let us know how the f/2L trial works out for you :P
 
Upvote 0
#11
Hate to throw you another curve ball, but a refurbished version of an older version of the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG OS APO HSM (Mfr# 136101 vs. the newer 137101) is available at Sigma's outlet store for $1999.

https://www.sigmaphoto.com/product/120-300mm-f28-ex-dg-os-apo-hsm-refurbished

I'm not familiar with the differences between the two lenses, so can't say how IQ compares.
 
Upvote 0
#12
Dylan777 said:
jdramirez said:
Mind if I throw in a curve ball into the mix? I've been thinking about a 200L f2. Which is a 280 f2.8... and a 400 f4...with extenders.

I too have thought about the 300mm, but the 200 seems more flexible with the added stop. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Size, weight and cost are about same between the two. Which is more important for you JD - reach or 1stop extra. Although I haven't try 200mm f2 with x1.4 yet, but I have feeling it can't win the bare 300mm f2.8 IS II in term of IQ.

I can do some test shots and share with you on 200mm f2 + 1.4x TC III later this week ;)
Click to expand...

You made the deal for all three lenses. kudos.
 
Upvote 0
#15
jdramirez said:
Dylan777 said:
jdramirez said:
Mind if I throw in a curve ball into the mix? I've been thinking about a 200L f2. Which is a 280 f2.8... and a 400 f4...with extenders.

I too have thought about the 300mm, but the 200 seems more flexible with the added stop. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Size, weight and cost are about same between the two. Which is more important for you JD - reach or 1stop extra. Although I haven't try 200mm f2 with x1.4 yet, but I have feeling it can't win the bare 300mm f2.8 IS II in term of IQ.

I can do some test shots and share with you on 200mm f2 + 1.4x TC III later this week ;)
Click to expand...

You made the deal for all three lenses. kudos.
Click to expand...

No, local camera deal didn't go through. Went with CPW-street price on 200mm f2. Received the lens yesterday. One word "AWESOME".

16-35 f4 IS and 35mm(might go with Sigma Art) are next.
 
Upvote 0
#16
jdramirez said:
Mind if I throw in a curve ball into the mix? I've been thinking about a 200L f2. Which is a 280 f2.8... and a 400 f4...with extenders.

I too have thought about the 300mm, but the 200 seems more flexible with the added stop. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

JD, here are some photos with 200mm f2 + 1.4x TC III.

These are raw, straight convert through LR5 with lens profile correction, minor adjustments in highlight & shadow etc...+25 in sharpness. 10-15 contrast: http://dylannguyen.smugmug.com/Lens-Test/200MM-F2-IS-14X-tc-iii/n-93P6B#!/

These are JPEG, SOOC: http://dylannguyen.smugmug.com/Lens-Test/200mm-f2-IS-14TC-III-JPEG/n-mJcgN#!/
 
Upvote 0
#17
kaihp said:
Dylan777 said:
Although I haven't try 200mm f2 with x1.4 yet, but I have feeling it can't win the bare 300mm f2.8 IS II in term of IQ.
Click to expand...

Let us know how the f/2L trial works out for you :P
Click to expand...

All I can say is awesome ;)
i-FzcJRt6.jpg
 
Upvote 0
#19
Just wanted to update my status: the 328 has arrived and I couldn't be happier. I thought my other L lenses focused fast before, this thing is miles ahead in terms of speed! Thank you all for your recommendations.
 
Upvote 0
#20
Dylan777 said:
jdramirez said:
Mind if I throw in a curve ball into the mix? I've been thinking about a 200L f2. Which is a 280 f2.8... and a 400 f4...with extenders.

I too have thought about the 300mm, but the 200 seems more flexible with the added stop. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

JD, here are some photos with 200mm f2 + 1.4x TC III.

These are raw, straight convert through LR5 with lens profile correction, minor adjustments in highlight & shadow etc...+25 in sharpness. 10-15 contrast: http://dylannguyen.smugmug.com/Lens-Test/200MM-F2-IS-14X-tc-iii/n-93P6B#!/

These are JPEG, SOOC: http://dylannguyen.smugmug.com/Lens-Test/200mm-f2-IS-14TC-III-JPEG/n-mJcgN#!/
Click to expand...

Too bad the bokeh is so bad... :P
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

kapalabhati
Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 Sports + Canon R7 = Complete Failure (works fine on R6/RP)
Replies
9
Views
1K
Michael Clark
Michael Clark
GirlsAreBeautiful
From 5D Mark III to R5 Mark II - photographer review - first 1 month and a half - 12k shots
Replies
31
Views
3K
GirlsAreBeautiful
GirlsAreBeautiful
E
Canon RF100-300mm F2.8 L IS USM Coming Soon for $9499?
Replies
7
Views
3K
EOS 4 Life
E
axtstern
Thoughts on the folly of buying an exciting camera of the future but then being stuck in the past.
Replies
18
Views
7K
scyrene
S
L
RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z
Replies
18
Views
7K
Ozarker
Ozarker
Top Bottom
Home
Forums
Media
Menu