Weighing in at a whopping 3390g and measuring 29cm in length, the Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 DG OS HSM S is a very big and heavy lens indeed, esepcially as that weight doesn't include the supplied tripod collar. As seen in the photos below, it dwarves even a full-frame camera like the Canon EOS 5D Mark III. This is not a lens that you can hand-hold for very long, being much more at home mounted on a sturdy tripod or monopod. A deep circular hood is supplied with the lens, which does a great job of shading the lens from extraneous light that may cause loss of contrast or flare. Contrast is good, even when shooting into the light. Another issue is that the mass of the lens shifts when zooming. Every time I mount a lens on my Gimbal head I balance it by adjusting the fore/aft position of the lens foot in the clamp. This means that when my hands are off the lens and camera, it is self-centering (if the tilt adjustment knob is loose). What I noticed with the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8, is that if I centered the lens when zoomed to 300 and then zoomed out to 120, the balance shifted to the front of the lens causing it to pitch downward.

300mm F2.8 DG OS HSM | Sports - SIGMA Corporation 120-300mm F2.8 DG OS HSM | Sports - SIGMA Corporation

With 1.4x APO Tele Converter, AF can operate between infnity and 0.53m. If the subject is closer than 0.53m, only MF is available.When looking at the maximum values, we see an increase in pincushion distortion as you increase in focal length, however it's still very low: less than 0.5% for full-frame and less than 0.25% for sub-frame. The Sigma 120-300mm ƒ/2.8 DG OS HSM Sports lens is a fantastic piece of glass that features professional-level image quality, build quality and features at a price point that, at least at the time of this review, are not matched by any other competing lens manufacturer.

Sigma 300mm f2.8 EX APO HSM | BirdForum Sigma 300mm f2.8 EX APO HSM | BirdForum

The separate focusing and zooming rings are wide with large rubber ribs for an easy grip. The zoom ring is larger at about 2.25 inches and has a two-tiered raised portion for easy identification without looking. The focus ring, on the other hand, is smaller at about 1.25 inches, with slightly smaller rubberized ribs. The zoom ring is farther away and the focus ring is closer to the camera. This is wide open. But these type of high contrast situations are pretty much the only time you'll see it. And lets not forget to mention it is the OOF area showing it; few are the lenses of this focal length that don't exhibit color aberrations in the OOF area. So to me, it's acceptable. Even at f16 this lens still delivered loads and loads of gorgeous bokeh when the subject was at the the closest focusing distance of 250cm / 98.4″. f32 The Sigma 300f2.8 has reasonably responsive focus. The Canon is however marginally better ...but not much. So the engineers really had to start from scratch. The FE 400/2.8 has 5 more elements than the Nikon 400 Z despite the fact the Nikon has the built in TC. Unlike the Nikon, Sony has only one large glass element up front, which probably explains why it is lighter. The Nikon design uses two large front elements like its F mount predecessor and it seems reasonable to assume that more R & D hours went into the Sony design.As for the timing, a mere 7 years after the A9 was released and utter joke it wasn't equal priority with the 400 f/2.8 and should have been released simultaneously." Unlike Nikon and Canon Sony doesn't have previous iterations of super teles to draw on. They inherited the license to produce the A-mount 300/2.8, but they didn't design it and IIRC the A-mount 500/4 was also designed by Minolta, prior to it's dissolution. Finally, at 300mm, overall sharpness is reduced, but the lens is still very usable at all apertures. At f/2.8 clarity approaches very good levels across the frame. With the aperture stopped down to between f/4 and f/8 sharpness exceeds very good levels across the frame. The drop-in 46mm filter holder in the rear part of the lens barrel can be rotated to facilitate the use of a polarizing filter. The lens, built like Megatron’s canon, has a very solid feeling to it. When it is focusing, you can barely feel it. This lens is much bigger than a Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6. It weighs just above 5 lbs and you do feel it in your arms. A monopod or tripod is more than recommended.

Sigma 300mm f2.8 EX - The Phoblographer Sigma 300mm f2.8 EX - The Phoblographer

No detailed information has been shared about the forthcoming lens. All we know, based on the name alone, is it will feature a 300mm focal length, a maximum F2.8 aperture and Sony’s OSS optical image stabilization. It will also be one of Sony’s top-shelf G Master lenses. What does that mean? We’ll leave it to Yasuyuki Nagata, head of Sony’s global interchangeable lens business, who shared the following quote with us in a 2019 interview regarding the company’s G Master telephoto lenses:However as we say it's horses for courses and this was my choice I think the best thing is to see if any local photographers have either of the lenses and give them a trial. I'm certain I would have been very happy with the 80-400 and can see many pros and cons for either lens.

Sigma 2.0x Teleconverter Review - Photography Life Sigma 2.0x Teleconverter Review - Photography Life

Zooming to 180mm results in sharpness across the frame evening a little at maximum aperture, with the clarity in the centre approaching excellent, while very good levels of clarity are achieved towards the edges of the frame. Stopping down the aperture to between f/4 and f/8 results in excellent sharpness across the frame at this focal length. As I have already pointed out in my Sigma 1.4x teleconverter review, none of the Nikon teleconverters mount on Sigma lenses. It turns out that teleconverters are brand-specific – Nikon teleconverters are designed to only work well with Nikkor lenses, while Sigma teleconverters are designed to only work well with Sigma lenses. So if you were thinking of buying a Sigma 2x teleconverter to be used for a Nikon telephoto or super-telephoto lens – forget it. Even though the teleconverter will physically mount on any Nikon telephoto lens that can take teleconverters and might perform well optically, it will still cause all kinds of lens communication and autofocus issues. For example, when I mounted the teleconverter on the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G VR II lens, it confused my camera into thinking that the maximum aperture of the lens was still at f/2.8 (the correct max aperture is f/5.6 instead, since 2x teleconverters lose two full stops of light). I also lost the ability to autofocus – the teleconverter caused the Nikon 300mm lens to go to an AF loop. In short, only use this teleconverter with Sigma lenses! Some CA/color fringing at and near wide open but only at very high contrast edges. No focus limiter is trying at times. Sometimes just wouldn't autofocus with the subject right in-front of you ( yes, subject further then minimum focus) The 300/2.8 was overwhelmingly the mainstay supertelephoto lens in major brand lineups from the mid-1970s through the 1990s. I doubt there was more than a handful of professional sports photographer in the 1980s who didn't have one; mid-sized U.S. newspapers often had several, and a big newspaper might have half a dozen. Those same newspapers might have one or two 400/2.8 and 600/4 lenses. Let’s talk about the weight issue now. At 3.39 kilos, this is not a light lens. And it is expected, given its fast aperture of f/2.8. The Nikon 400mm f/2.8G VR is also a monster of a lens for that very reason. However, this is no 400mm and the lens barrel is nowhere as long in comparison. So the central issue with the weight is the fact that the lens is too heavy for its compact size. I have shot with the 500mm f/4G VR quite a bit (which in my opinion is the best hand-holdable Nikkor super-telephoto) and while it is a slightly heavier lens (by about 500 grams), it is much easier to hand-hold.Portraits with the Sigma 300mm 2.8EX are really interesting. First off, the lens has great compression. Shooting with this lens means you have to be a bit farther away from your subject, giving you a smaller angle of view to work with. You have to realize that you don’t have to shoot at f2.8 to get nice Bokeh. You can get really pleasing bokeh at f4 or f5.6. Your lighting has to be off camera because an on camera flash just will not reach. Simple natural light portraits come out very nice, particularly if the sun is in front of the subject. Image Quality The 120-300mm f2.8 benefits from the latest Nikon optical technology as the results clearly demonstrate. But it clearly belongs to the E FL generation of lenses in terms of build (still pretty light all things considered). Meaning that it does not benefit from the next generation build enhancements seen in the breakthrough Z mount 400mm f2.8 TC and 600mm f4 TC. All companies develop some technologies and deploy them in products when they are ready. Other wide open shots are quite good. Just how good can it get? Have a look here: http://public.fotki.com/m8o/outdoor_adventures/tanzania-2007/070812--tarangire-1/imgp4580.html Lenses aren't purely about sharpness of course, but the Sigma does extremely well in all respects. Chromatic aberration is visible at 120mm, but diminishes to nothing at 300mm. Vignetting is nothing to worry about, at a maximum of 1.4 stops wide open at 300mm. Distortion is well controlled too: it's essentially perfectly-correctedat 120mm, but there's a little pincushion distortion at 300mm.