SIGMA's new AF 120-300mm f/2.8 DG EX APO HSM OS

[DonSchap]

Has anyone popped for the SIGMA's AF 120-300mm f/2.8 DG EX APO HSM OS (5.7-lb.) lens, yet? This would seem to be the one to have for the just about everything telephoto lens ... and the waistline to go with it. At the MSRP of $4700 it is, admittedly, a little rich for most folks, but you never know.

It's new ... and stabilized. How does that shake out?

[Switchblade906]

You know i havent gotten this lens but for what its worth its only (i say only like i could afford it lol) 3,199.00 Click Here at B&H Photo Video

[K1W1]

Sigma's MSRP numbers are generally on a different planet to the one buyers live on.

It's only Aus$3500.00 here and that is at one of the more expensive places to shop.

[tim11]

So expensive at such limited range.. I'd see more value if it's 70-300 or 80-400...

[DonSchap]

Just doing some quick calculations, Canon's fixed focal length EF 400mm f/2.8 IS II L USM (~$10.5k) weighs 8.4 lbs. The first version ($7.5k) was 11.7 lbs. I feel we can take that 8+ pounds as the absolute minimum that this 80-400 ZOOM lens idea can weigh.

Now, I don't know about the rest of you he-men, but that is for all practicality, about the weight of a bowling ball. Add the weight of the camera ... another two pounds ... and you are toting something that just is not worth the effort, for the most part. That first element has to weigh on the order of ~6.5-lbs. Now, stick it out 400mm in front of the camera. No way!

I mean, as an optional pro-football lens, maybe?

SIGMA already has their "Hulk" lens, the Green Goliath => 200-500mm f/2.8 DG APO ($26k)



and that bad boy is 33 lbs. It uses a flippin' Frisbee as a lens cover. You cannot use a conventional tripod to hold it ... so, you have to ask yourself, "Do I need a staff to manage this thing?"

The magic of 120-300mm f/2.8, is that for about the same weight as the standard fixed focal length 300mm f/2.8, you can get a manageable zoom! The standard 300mm f/2.8 also costs 2x as much. The way I see it ... it is the 300mm f/2.8 ... with a widener on it. Since I, personally, cannot sport $6200 for the Sony ... this is the next logical step for brightness.

[Switchblade906]

If i had the money i would absolutely buy it but that isn't the case. Well unless I win the lotto lol

[tim11]

Bring that Sigma to a war zone and tell me what happen when (if?) you manage to get back.

[Switchblade906]

What lens are you talking about, the huge "Hulk" lens or the 120-300mm?

[tim11]

I was referring to the hulk, especially if you can get one with that army green. But again, any zoom lens will attract attentions from snipers in a battle zone for obvious reason.

[Switchblade906]

Why did war come up? I pretty sure that Don isnt going to be going to war lol