Sigma 120-300 F/2.8 DG OS HSM

IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
edited June 13, 2013 in Cameras
For anyone (particular Nikon shooters) waiting for this bad boy to hit the stores, go ahead and breathe. You'll turn blue before you can get happy. The Sigma BS machine is up and running. Here's what the Sigma website says as of today: "The updated 120-300mm F2.8 DG OS HSM lens will be available in early May for the street price of $3,599 in Sigma and Canon mounts." OK, first thing, that means screw you Nikonians. Second, it is no longer "early May" in case you hadn't noticed, Sigma.
John :
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.

Comments

  • jonh68jonh68 Registered Users Posts: 2,711 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2013
    Icebear wrote: »
    For anyone (particular Nikon shooters) waiting for this bad boy to hit the stores, go ahead and breathe. You'll turn blue before you can get happy. The Sigma BS machine is up and running. Here's what the Sigma website says as of today: "The updated 120-300mm F2.8 DG OS HSM lens will be available in early May for the street price of $3,599 in Sigma and Canon mounts." OK, first thing, that means screw you Nikonians. Second, it is no longer "early May" in case you hadn't noticed, Sigma.

    I don't see how this is a "screw you" to Nikon like it's a personal thing. I've long learned to not get hopes up on new releases. Nothing to get your underwear in a wad.
    www.jonimages.com
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2013
    Life's more interesting when you take things personally, doncha know? :D
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • Matthew SavilleMatthew Saville Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,352 Major grins
    edited May 25, 2013
    Only $3600? Wow! That's petty cash compared to the Canon 200-400 f/4 1.4x... I suppose Sigma just wanted to get it to compete in that market ASAP. I'm sure the Nikon model will come as soon as it can.

    If anybody is laughing in the face of their market right now, it's not Sigma or Nikon...

    =Matt=
    “My first thought is always of light.” – Galen Rowell
    My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,156 moderator
    edited May 25, 2013
    B&H and Adorama both have the new Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG OS APO HSM listed for pre-order, and in Nikon, Canon and Sigma mounts.

    Nikon mount:
    Canon mount:

    Sigma mount:
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited May 25, 2013
    They've had them available for preorder for weeks, if not months. B&H, for example, has pushed back their expected fulfillment date twice, and now just says that it's a new item, available for pre-order, with no expected date. I don't point this out as a knock on B&H, but as a "C'MON!!, dammit!" to Sigma.

    Matt, if you think the price on the NEW 120-300 is awesome, check out the existing model, (EX DG OS APO HSM) which also gets great reviews. Try $2500.00. Near as I can tell, the optics are pretty much the same, but it does not have a focus limiter, nor all the customizable tweaks that the new lens has. I don't know those bells & whistles are worth a 44% premium.
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • Matthew SavilleMatthew Saville Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,352 Major grins
    edited May 25, 2013
    Icebear wrote: »
    They've had them available for preorder for weeks, if not months. B&H, for example, has pushed back their expected fulfillment date twice, and now just says that it's a new item, available for pre-order, with no expected date. I don't point this out as a knock on B&H, but as a "C'MON!!, dammit!" to Sigma.

    Matt, if you think the price on the NEW 120-300 is awesome, check out the existing model, (EX DG OS APO HSM) which also gets great reviews. Try $2500.00. Near as I can tell, the optics are pretty much the same, but it does not have a focus limiter, nor all the customizable tweaks that the new lens has. I don't know those bells & whistles are worth a 44% premium.

    Laughing.gif well then it sounds to me like you just gave us a solution to all your frustration, if you have $2500 to spend. And I find it hard to empathize with anyone who does, yet complains about not having an opportunity to spend $3600 instead for what may very well be a minimal improvement...

    =Matt=
    “My first thought is always of light.” – Galen Rowell
    My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited May 25, 2013
    Matthew Saville wrote: »
    Laughing.gif well then it sounds to me like you just gave us a solution to all your frustration, if you have $2500 to spend. And I find it hard to empathize with anyone who does, yet complains about not having an opportunity to spend $3600 instead for what may very well be a minimal improvement...

    =Matt=
    Yeah, you got me there. mwink.gif The lack of a focus limiter is a legitimate drawback for sports shooting, but that's quite a premium. I guess what I'm hoping for is for someone to do a practical head-to-head comparison and make some statement as to image quality. If the new beast has noticeably superior performance, I'd say it was worth the extra $$. OTOH, I'm not interested in paying $1100 more just for the ability to fine-tune autofocus speed, OS characteristics, and sixteen different AF micro-adjust zones if the basics are comparable.
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited May 25, 2013
    Matthew Saville wrote: »
    Only $3600? Wow! That's petty cash compared to the Canon 200-400 f/4 1.4x...

    Apples and oranges.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • Matthew SavilleMatthew Saville Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,352 Major grins
    edited May 26, 2013
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    Apples and oranges.
    ...I assume you mean that in a good way, or at least a neutral way?

    Really, for the price of the new Sigma I highly doubt it is anything less than flawlessly sharp, and so the only major advantage of the 200-400 is the ability to get to 280-560mm f/5.6 with the flip of a switch. And to get that convenience, you forfeit f/2.8 in the same lens and the ability to fine tune your autofocus calibration very precisely. (Although the latest Canon cameras can calibrate any lens at the long and short end, which probably will suffice in many situations)

    Now I'm not a full-time telephoto sports shooter, but I have shot my fair share of extreme action telephoto sports, and I'd take a 120-300 f/2.8 with a 1.4X and/or a 2X TC any day. I know others may have different needs, and in that case maybe the 200-400 is the right apple or orange for them.
    “My first thought is always of light.” – Galen Rowell
    My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited May 26, 2013
    Icebear wrote: »
    I guess what I'm hoping for is for someone to do a practical head-to-head comparison and make some statement as to image quality.

    Well, guess what. Sigma has done just that. Their website is a bit clunky, but I found the MTF charts for both lenses and it's pretty much what I'd suspected. They are optically identical. Decision made. I'm sticking with old school.

    Somebody else can try to figure out all the AF fine tune micro adjusting, etc. Think about this: when you're fine tuning your AF in the camera, you take a shot, analyze what you see on the screen, hit the menu button, tweak the setting, and take another shot. It's an iterative process, no? Someone please tell me how you're going to do that if EVERY TIME you shoot your target, you have to demount your lens, put it on the USB dock, plug it into your computer, open the Sigma software, and GUESS what microadjustment to make. Then remount the lens and shoot your target again to see what difference you've made. Are you REALLY going to do that?? eek7.gif Not this guy. I'll just stick with the camera body AF fine tuning, thank you very much.
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited May 26, 2013
    Matthew Saville wrote: »
    ...and so the only major advantage of the 200-400 is the ability to get to 280-560mm f/5.6 with the flip of a switch. And to get that convenience, you forfeit f/2.8 in the same lens and the ability to fine tune your autofocus calibration very precisely. . .
    Now I'm not a full-time telephoto sports shooter, but I have shot my fair share of extreme action telephoto sports, and I'd take a 120-300 f/2.8 with a 1.4X and/or a 2X TC any day. I know others may have different needs, and in that case maybe the 200-400 is the right apple or orange for them.
    Matt, I like your practical approach here. Also, if I carry an FX and a DX body to an event, I have covered (with one lens and a TC) 120-450 f/2.8 and 170-630 f/4. An extra body and a TC are lighter and more compact than a second lens. I'm getting excited. Wildlife anyone?
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited May 27, 2013
    Matthew Saville wrote: »
    ...I assume you mean that in a good way, or at least a neutral way?

    I agree with you, but I was just stating the fact that a $12000 200-400/4 and a $3500 120-300/2.8 from two different manufacturers aren't worth comparing.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited May 27, 2013
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    I agree with you, but I was just stating the fact that a $12000 200-400/4 and a $3500 120-300/2.8 from two different manufacturers aren't worth comparing.
    Unless they are. mwink.gif
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited May 27, 2013
    Icebear wrote: »
    Unless they are. mwink.gif

    This is like saying hmm, that VW Passat is a little expensive, but hey it's cheaper than the Audi A8, so it's a good deal.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • Matthew SavilleMatthew Saville Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,352 Major grins
    edited May 27, 2013
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    I agree with you, but I was just stating the fact that a $12000 200-400/4 and a $3500 120-300/2.8 from two different manufacturers aren't worth comparing.

    Not worth comparing? Why not? They're both insanely sharp. They're both built rock-solid, with current generation autofocus and stabilization, and they're both in roughly the same focal range.

    Think of it this way: basically you are saying that because the price difference is so huge, the cheaper one shouldn't even be considered as an option or alternative if you can afford the more expensive one.

    Let me put it this way, even though the analogy is pretty weak: If I'm ever filthy rich some day, I'm not spending a quarter-million dollars on some new high-tech Ferrari just because it's the best.. I'd buy Magnum PI's Ferrari, (308) or Sonny Crockett's Ferrari. (Daytona Spider) ...even though they only cost about $30-50K used these days... :-D

    I know that analogy doesn't really work when comparing the performance of two different lenses, of course. I'm just saying, if it's the best tool for the job, who cares what it costs?

    =Matt=
    “My first thought is always of light.” – Galen Rowell
    My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited May 27, 2013
    15524779-Ti.gif
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited May 27, 2013
    Matthew Saville wrote: »
    Not worth comparing? Why not? They're both insanely sharp.

    You own or have used the new Sigma 120-300/2.8? Wow, you have more connections than I thought.
    Think of it this way: basically you are saying that because the price difference is so huge, the cheaper one shouldn't even be considered as an option or alternative if you can afford the more expensive one.

    No. I'm saying if you can't afford the 200-400/4, it's not worth mentioning. See my Passat vs. A8 comment. If you can afford it, then you can buy whatever you darn well please.
    Let me put it this way, even though the analogy is pretty weak: If I'm ever filthy rich some day, I'm not spending a quarter-million dollars on some new high-tech Ferrari just because it's the best.. I'd buy Magnum PI's Ferrari, (308) or Sonny Crockett's Ferrari. (Daytona Spider) ...even though they only cost about $30-50K used these days... :-D

    308 GTS is one of the hottest cars ever made. But if you buy a Daytona Spyder I will lose all respect for you. ;-)
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • fusionsfusions Registered Users Posts: 2 Beginner grinner
    edited May 30, 2013
    Sigma says...
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    You own or have used the new Sigma 120-300/2.8? Wow, you have more connections than I thought.



    No. I'm saying if you can't afford the 200-400/4, it's not worth mentioning. See my Passat vs. A8 comment. If you can afford it, then you can buy whatever you darn well please.



    308 GTS is one of the hottest cars ever made. But if you buy a Daytona Spyder I will lose all respect for you. ;-)


    Spoke to Sigma yesterday, they claim the Nikon version will hit USA Monday next week and should hit their vendors sometime late next week. They did not say how many, but apparently around 24 come at a time from Japan... Canon version first round supposedly hit last week....
  • QarikQarik Registered Users Posts: 4,959 Major grins
    edited June 3, 2013
    the new 120-300 sigma has a USB port that is supposed to help with AF. I don't know about the older model the the newer one has pretty good AF. If it is better than the older one then the price difference maybe worth it because super teles NEED good AF when you think about what they are used for (sports and birds).
    D700, D600
    14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
    85 and 50 1.4
    45 PC and sb910 x2
    http://www.danielkimphotography.com
  • OstravaczechOstravaczech Registered Users Posts: 45 Big grins
    edited June 3, 2013
    As of today, June 03, in stock at BH Photo for both Canon as well as Nikon mount.
  • ChromeDomeChromeDome Registered Users Posts: 1 Beginner grinner
    edited June 10, 2013
    Canon mount, but still no Nikon
    Ostravaczech wrote: »
    As of today, June 03, in stock at BH Photo for both Canon as well as Nikon mount.

    Nothing for Nikon @ B&H on the 3rd, and still nothing as of today (June 10, 2013)
    Even the Sigma website shows the Nikon version available only for pre-order.
  • fusionsfusions Registered Users Posts: 2 Beginner grinner
    edited June 13, 2013
    ChromeDome wrote: »
    Nothing for Nikon @ B&H on the 3rd, and still nothing as of today (June 10, 2013)
    Even the Sigma website shows the Nikon version available only for pre-order.

    Just got mine from Beachcamera.com, will arrive tomorrow. They are smaller than BH/Adorma so the few they got were not on an endless backorder. No dock though, so Im not sure how much fun I will have with it until it arrives. The strength of this len's customization is also a bit of a weakness. Without the dock i miss much. As for the samples pics out there already, the sharpness is amazing for a zoom lens and rivals a prime. I will see how the autofocus performs...
Sign In or Register to comment.