More Telephoto

[Peekayoh]

I envy you!

[Erad]

I just picked up this bad boy a few days ago. so far working great, although it doesnt have HSM the focus to me is pretty darn fast, but not as quiet as HSM motor. i may pick up a 1.4x tele but i need to shoot at 300mm for atleast a couple more months to determine if i do need the extra reach. i purchased this for wildlife/nature and sports, my kids start soccer soon.


Sigma 300mm f2.8 by arociojr, on Flickr

[sparkie1263]

I just picked up this bad boy a few days ago. so far working great, although it doesnt have HSM the focus to me is pretty darn fast, but not as quiet as HSM motor. i may pick up a 1.4x tele but i need to shoot at 300mm for atleast a couple more months to determine if i do need the extra reach. i purchased this for wildlife/nature and sports, my kids start soccer soon.


Sigma 300mm f2.8 by arociojr, on Flickr

Congrats on the new lens!! Looks great.

Frank

[DonSchap]

I have to say, waving a 5.3 lb lens around is biting off a big piece. I sure hope you get the shots you want from this beast. That's a whole lot of fixed lens. I trust you have a good tripod to go with it?

If you had to go PRIME, you might have been better off purchasing a Minolta 200mm f/2.8 HS G and tossing a converter on it. It would be a whole lot lighter, in the woods.

Best of luck.

BTW: If you are going to tote that size lens on the camera, lose the standard SONY neck strap and get yourself a BlackRapid strap instead, before you wind up losing your camera to strap failure. It's always a hell of a surprise when you feel your camera and lens suddenly crashing to the ground. The regular neck strap is just not rated to support anywhere near that kind of weight. You have been warned.

[Rooz]

Great lens and a much better decision than a tc option. Right lens for the job and you'll be blown away at the shots you pull out of it.

[Peekayoh]

Nice one, Erad!
Don't forget to post some images with it. I don't think I've seen anything produced by that lens.

[DonSchap]

Does ANYONE own a SONY/Minolta AF 300mm f/2.8 G SSM lens? Heck, I'd like to see an example of that $6000 bad boy under some extreme conditions. I suspect a lot of them are still on shelves, somewhere. That's a lot of money to tie up in a seldom used piece of glass for most folks. It also weighs in at a substantial amount. Glass is glass, of course. f/2.8 is big glass.

Speaking of which, Minolta produced an AF 300mm f/4 G HS for field use. Fast to focus and significantly lighter (due to the smaller front element), affordable (relatively... ~$2000) and easier to wield. I almost went for one of these, myself, but simply could not justify it sitting idle... plus the fact that the newer SONY 70-400MM f/4-5.6 G SSM does such a flexible and splendid job, for $500 less.

This one was formerly considered the Minolta "sports lens."

Heck, no harm in giving them a try, right?

[Erad]

Thanks Peekayoh and Rooz. Actually i use a Monopod with this lens. I dont use the strap, i dont feel safe with a lens of this weight pulling down on the mount.

I went out for a shoot today at a local park, here are my results.


Hawk by arociojr, on Flickr

100% crop

Hawk by arociojr, on Flickr


Bird by arociojr, on Flickr

[Rooz]

don if the 70-400 sony does aswell as the 300/4 minolta, all that says is that the 300 minolta isnt all that flash. primes will almost always outperform zooms and especially in the longer range arena. so yes you get the flexibility but you will lose a significant level of IQ. heavy ? shit yeah ! but boy oh boy...they are worth every penny. here is the difference between the 300/2.8 and 300/4 nikkors. i was thrilled with the 300/4 and thought the IQ was superb until i got my hands on the 2.8.



One Stop by .Chris.K, on Flickr

the numbers are the size differences. width/length/weight.


46.34.1140 by .Chris.K, on Flickr

[Erad]

don if the 70-400 sony does aswell as the 300/4 minolta, all that says is that the 300 minolta isnt all that flash. primes will almost always outperform zooms and especially in the longer range arena. so yes you get the flexibility but you will lose a significant level of IQ. heavy ? shit yeah ! but boy oh boy...they are worth every penny. here is the difference between the 300/2.8 and 300/4 nikkors. i was thrilled with the 300/4 and thought the IQ was superb until i got my hands on the 2.8.



One Stop by .Chris.K, on Flickr

the numbers are the size differences. width/length/weight.


46.34.1140 by .Chris.K, on Flickr

look at that glass, such beauty!

The front element of my sigma 300/2.8


Sigma 300mm f2.8 by arociojr, on Flickr