300 2.8/4 Lenses

ABWildlifePhoto

ABWildlifePhoto

Suspended / Banned
Messages
52
Name
Alex
Edit My Images
No
Will almost certainly be purchasing the new Canon 7d mkii and am looking at the following lenses. I photograph wildlife almost exclusively...

Sigma 300mm f/2.8
Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 OS (not the latest sport version)
Canon 300mm f/4 IS

Will obviously be looking at relevant converters too!

Any help is greatly appreciated on which of these lenses is the best!

Alex
 
Don't forget the Canon 400mm f5.6 - great price - lightweight - hand holdable - very good IQ etc.

although AF will not work with a x 2 TC
 
The 300mm f4. Minimum focus distance is only 1.5m- compared to 2.5m for the 120-300 or 3.5m for the 400mm f5.6- so it'll be good for your butterflies and dragonflies. You'll probably want something longer at some point though.
 
I've only used the Sigma 300mm f/2.8 out those you've listed and find it to be a fine lens.
 
unless the build has changed since I had one (had 120-300 and canon f4 300).. the 120-300 is much heavier than the canon 300 f4 for hand holding.. ... also.. might seem silly this.. the sigma is metal and in winter is very cold hand held.. canon not so..

I actualy saw the canon f4 as an upgrade from the 120-300 and its the turning point that got me into primes.. you lose versatlitiy but quality is wow!
 
You say you photograph wildlife, what do you use at the moment?
 
I'm not sure I'd strongly recommend the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 OS for small wildlife, if you're liable to want to crop signficantly. It's a very good lens, certainly, but I still find myself leaning strongly toward the Nikkor 300mm f/4D AF-S, which obviously isn't an option in this case. It sounds like Canon's equivalent is similarly superb, however.

Just to complicate things a bit - if you could live with the slower aperture, might either of the new Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 be useful for you? Going by the MTF charts, both might actually be very sharp, even at their full reach - on APS-C (I use a D7100), nominally even better than the Nikkor 300mm f/4.
 
There has been several variants of the sigma 120-300mm f2.8, the OS version previous and Sports version current have definitely improved on the few flaws with this lens, especially in low light, don't get me wrong for the money the sigma 120-300 is a fantastic lens, fast focusing, but is not a canon 300mm f2.8, but then again you're paying more of a premium for that. You could look at the used market as this may bring the Sport verison into your budget range, but these lenses were significantly better than the sigma 300 prime which isn't as fast focusing as the 120-300.

The canon 400mm f5.6 the lens alot of bird photographers use because of its weight and fast focus, the 300mm f4 IS and 1.4x TC another option. You could even look for a used canon 300mm f2.8 (non IS) version, i've got the IS version and its works well with the 1.4x and 2x TCs, I've even stacked the MKII TCs when the conditions have been right on stationary subjects.

View attachment 21277
 
Last edited:
I would certainly think about the 400 f5.6. Met a bloke yesterday who was using one on a 1DX. i was using a 300 f4 + 1.4 on the same body. The 300f4 plus converter is pretty sharp but I was really impressed with how quick the AF on the 400 was. To me the only slight downside on the 300 is the AF is a little slow.

A 400 + a 1.4 and AF still at f8 on a 7D MkII sounds a pretty good versatile combination.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top