Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 53

Thread: More Telephoto

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554

    Correction...

    Of "limited use", would probably be more appropriate. For the past seven years or so, since this particular lens has been available, SONY has me struggling to justify $6000 for a lens that is going to be, for the most part... collecting dust. Even at half that, which this lens should probably be, I would be hard-pressed to pull the trigger or a rabbit out of my hat, Peter. Even the 200mm f/2.8 HS G seems a little extravagant, indoors.

    Outdoors, where you are looking beyond 10-feet, I could buy into it. Otherwise, it snips so much out of a shot it's like looking through a golden straw.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Wild, Wonderful, Wyoming
    Posts
    1,043
    Criticizing a lens because it doesn't fit your particular set of parameters is very typical of you. You've now picked out a very small situation where, yes, this usefulness of this lens is, uh, not so useful. Try capturing an eagle flying in Yellowstone or a shy Coyote or even more shy Wolf, that's what a 500mm f/4 is for. I think I'd probably rather...no much rather be capturing a Grizzly with the 500mm than your 200mm. How about sports, the OPs lens choice is absolutely a perfect lens for sports having enough reach to get SI quality shots. A 500mm lens is hardly an indoor lens, and shouldn't even be thought of as one, it's silly for you to use that as an excuse. I guess it doesn't work for you, doesn't fit you shooting style, then maybe, don't buy one, but don't lambaste someone who does. I'm looking forward to the wildlife shots captured with that bad boy.
    A good photograph is knowing where to stand.
    Ansel Adams

    Rule books are paper, they will not cushion a sudden meeting of stone and metal.
    Ernest K. Gann-Fate is the Hunter.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    310
    Quote Originally Posted by TenD View Post
    Criticizing a lens because it doesn't fit your particular set of parameters is very typical of you. You've now picked out a very small situation where, yes, this usefulness of this lens is, uh, not so useful. Try capturing an eagle flying in Yellowstone or a shy Coyote or even more shy Wolf, that's what a 500mm f/4 is for. I think I'd probably rather...no much rather be capturing a Grizzly with the 500mm than your 200mm. How about sports, the OPs lens choice is absolutely a perfect lens for sports having enough reach to get SI quality shots. A 500mm lens is hardly an indoor lens, and shouldn't even be thought of as one, it's silly for you to use that as an excuse. I guess it doesn't work for you, doesn't fit you shooting style, then maybe, don't buy one, but don't lambaste someone who does. I'm looking forward to the wildlife shots captured with that bad boy.
    I agree with this. I did extensive research before i jumped into this expensive piece of glass. I personally would rather carry around a heavy GOOD quality glass and get THE shot than sacrifice quality for a lighter lens. every lens has its purpose, if it doesnt fit your needs, DONT GET IT! Theres no need to criticize people for using a particular product just because you wouldnt use it. Just be happy that you have the glass that fits your needs just like we are happy that we carry glass that fits our needs.

    Here are a couple soccer photos i shot a couple weekends ago. Im sure i could have got the same shots with a 70-200mm or 70-400mm, but i know i wouldnt get the same sharpness and bokeh.


    Striker by arociojr, on Flickr


    Rush by arociojr, on Flickr
    Flickr

    Sony a560 w/ B50AM Vertical Grip
    Sigma 300mm f/2.8 EX DG APO

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Erad View Post
    I


    Striker by arociojr, on Flickr
    that's just brilliant.

    Don, it's not up to Sony to convince you of anything. Just cos it has a Sony badge doesn't mean you have to buy it. You buy it if it suits you're purposes, and that's pretty much all it comes down to. A 300/2.8 is certainly a specialized tool, no doubt about it. But it does it's intended purpose so wonderfully well.

    Look at the quality of the images coming out of this thing. Sharp as a tack, great bokeh, fantastic color and contrast. That's what you pay the money for. Alot of people don't want to make do with some bodgy tamron 200-500 lens. For some, image quality is paramount....go figure !

    But the best glass you can afford. And if you can't afford it, start saving.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554

    At the WPPI Convention Trade Show, cont'd...

    SIGMA had a very respectable booth set up for their lenses... and I made a beeline to the one I was most interested in:

    The newest SIGMA 120-300mm F2.8 EX DG OS APO HSM

    Name:  120-300mm_f28_EX_DG_OS_HSM.jpg
Views: 64
Size:  46.5 KB

    Now, to be fair, I also grabbed the standard SIGMA 300mm F2.8 EX APO DG HSM, a "PRIME", for comparison purposes.

    Name:  195_300mm_f28_EX_DG.jpg
Views: 70
Size:  67.0 KB


    I swapped the lenses for a good half hour, on a Canon 5DMkII camera body. Why a Canon? Well, mainly because the Canon-mount was what they had at the show, but also because SIGMA, in its infinite wisdom, decided not to manufacture this particular lens in the SONY(Minolta)-mount... and as such, missed that sale opportunity.

    Anyway, back-and-forth I went, shooting this and that... immediately doing an ad hoc comparison between the two lenses. My friends, swapping $3000+ "five-pounders" back and forth is not for the meek of heart. The result clearly showed that the 120-300mm f/2.8 ZOOM lens shot a more finely focused image, at the f/2.8 aperture, than the PRIME did. Now, admittedly, I was shooting w/o a tripod... and the 120-300mm f/2.8 has stability in it, so the prime was disadvantaged, but I balanced the lenses on the counter, to steady them, because seven pounds of camera is... well, let's just say it is "a challenge," when you are not used to it.

    I even made a comment to the guy at the counter, who was looking a little nervous through all this, and he agreed, "I noticed that, too."

    Now, either the PRIME lens was out of whack (hey, it's possible...) or this "newest" zoom design is just awesome. Like I said, if they had had a SONY-mount... it would have come home with me. You have no idea how frustrating living with that kind of marketing stupidity is. All mounts should be represented.

    Regardless... the 120-300mm represents the kind of lens that I would gladly invest in, over the "You're stuck at 300mm 7/24, MATE!" I would find the zoom a carload more useful... and maybe even preferred over the wider focal range of the somewhat lighter (and that's saying something) SONY 70-400mm f/4-5.6 G SSM.

    You can sing and dance around this all you want. I sought out my answer, received it, and if you are not checking this comparison out, your own fine self, you are just missing it... and I suppose that speaks for itself. Nice work, SIGMA... now, make it in the SONY-mount. I wants it.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 03-06-2012 at 03:08 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,760
    50mm will get you ant shot...you just have to walk more

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554
    Quote Originally Posted by SONYNUT View Post
    50mm will get you ant shot...you just have to walk more
    You just step up and tell that right to the Referee, as you stand in the middle of the football field, getting your shot of the quarterback's arse... and Security is coming to hustle you off to the pokey!

    Play fair, Steve.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,421
    If you are trying to suggest that the 100-300f2.8 lens provides the same level of image quality as the 3002.8, you will need to provide some sort of evidence for this, as it is certainly not consistent with all of the tests and information I have read. I don't even know why you'd buy the 100-300. What would you use it for ?

    In all likelihood I'd imagine you'd whack a 3x tc on it and shoot it at f16 or something which of course negates the whole purpose of the lens to begin with. lol
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Wild, Wonderful, Wyoming
    Posts
    1,043
    I'm highly interested in the 120-300 f/2.8 too...and hmmm it fits my camera and has OS in lens. In no way do I think it's better than a 300mm f/2.8, but I think it's a nice compromise for me. I already have a 500 f/4.5 (older Canon).
    A good photograph is knowing where to stand.
    Ansel Adams

    Rule books are paper, they will not cushion a sudden meeting of stone and metal.
    Ernest K. Gann-Fate is the Hunter.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554

    Test drive...

    Jim,

    If you have the cash reserve, order both SIGMA lenses and do the testing. I think you be relatively amazed at the difference and how nice this new lens performs over the 300mm prime or any other lens of similar design. After concentrating on the wider aperture, I feel SIGMA has a real winner in this lens. It is definitely worth a peek.

    Just for sheer flexibility alone, the 120-300 trumps the 300mm prime.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 03-06-2012 at 06:42 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •