Why should't I buy this lens

S

slowpoke

Senior Member
I'm thinking of buying the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 ex dg os apo hsm af Lens and 2x teleconverter.It's lighter than my
Sigma 50-500mm that needs a tripod and the 2x will give me the reach.The f/2.8 gives me plenty of light and even
with the teleconverter on at 300mm the Ap is at f/4. So why do I have doubts about this lens giving me sharp shots.
 
G

gqtuazon

Gear Head
It looks like a good lens. I'm not sure if it will work well with a 2x TC. You might have to stop it down to f5.6 to f8 with a TC.
 
§

§am

Senior Member
Two reasons not to buy a lens;
1) You can't afford it; 2) You won't use it

Opt for #2... I'll gladly take donation of the unused lens :p
 
§

§am

Senior Member
Ahh but a loan implies return. I'm talking a one way loan ;P

And just read a review of the lens you're after and looks nice :)
 
D

Dave_W

The Dude
I'm going to be the stick in the mud and say there's a very good reason not to buy it - it's a Sigma and not a Nikkor lens. You lose resale value and I've yet to find a case where a non-Nikkor lens is equal or better than the corresponding Nikkor lens. I've heard the Sigma 24-70mm VR is a darn good lens but not quite as sharp as the Nikkor but it does have VR. That said, Nikkor will be unavailing their new 24-70mm VR lens later this year or early next year and it will be interesting to learn how the two lenses compare to one another.
 
S

slowpoke

Senior Member
Sorry,aint no sticks here.lol I have no problem putting out 3k for a good lens.But I'm a novice and 6k is way too much to shot birds
on Saturdays,We won't talk about the mushrooms.:rolleyes:
 
P

pedroj

Senior Member
Mojo Dave said:
I'm going to be the stick in the mud and say there's a very good reason not to buy it - it's a Sigma and not a Nikkor lens. You lose resale value and I've yet to find a case where a non-Nikkor lens is equal or better than the corresponding Nikkor lens. I've heard the Sigma 24-70mm VR is a darn good lens but not quite as sharp as the Nikkor but it does have VR. That said, Nikkor will be unavailing their new 24-70mm VR lens later this year or early next year and it will be interesting to learn how the two lenses compare to one another.
Click to expand...

All things being equal You would buy Nikon, but with this 120-300 focal lengths I don't think Nikon have one in the same range...Sigma in the past made a good 100-300 F4 but would probably be to slow with a x2 converter..
 
Last edited:
G

Geoffc

Senior Member
My only comment would be to make sure the autofocus is fast enough as at least one review thought it was slow. If that's the case and you put a TC on it you may feel it is painful as that will slow it down further.

I have a Nikon 70-200 2.8 and the autofocus is virtually instant. You may find that this with a 2 * TC is good enough in terms of focal length. I reckon the cost of the combo is about the same, however you get probably the best big zoom on the planet when the TC is not attached.

I have also noticed that this lens is so good I get better images shot at 200mm and cropped than my 75-300 at 300mm. Not an entirely fair test but I did test it to see which to use when I need the range.

Sorry if I've gone a bit off track.
 
S

slowpoke

Senior Member
Your trackin ok,lol I can't remember the last time I used autofocus.(maybe I should)but thats me being creative. My maine interest is
sharpness and from what I've read this lens has it,way out at 300mm.I'll have to see with the 2x attached.Thanks,Geoffc
 
P

pedroj

Senior Member
Another option which I think would be OK is the 300mm F4 AF-S lens....The Nikon x 2 converter doesn't AF with it, but Kenko make a x 2 converter that does, but would probably hunt in low light..
 
S

slowpoke

Senior Member
Thank you,pedroj.I am kinda hooked on the 120-300mm2.8.For me the 2.8 is the tops.I have the Sigma 50-500mmF/4-6.3 now.There is no way I could put the 2x converter on it.So I was hoping the 120-300mm would handle it.lol
 
G

grandpaw

Senior Member
I just caught this thread and would like to add some info. I have the Nikon 70-200VR F2.8 and use it with the NEW Nikon 20E III 2x converter and I am really happy with it. I have the option of using it without the converter at F2.8 but when the converter is on it it becomes a F5.6. This combo with the NEW converter is very sharp and works very well. All functions work with the converter on it just as well as with the lens alone. You might consider the new Nikon 70-200 VRII with this converter.
 
D

Dave_W

The Dude
grandpaw said:
I just caught this thread and would like to add some info. I have the Nikon 70-200VR F2.8 and use it with the NEW Nikon 20E III 2x converter and I am really happy with it. I have the option of using it without the converter at F2.8 but when the converter is on it it becomes a F5.6. This combo with the NEW converter is very sharp and works very well. All functions work with the converter on it just as well as with the lens alone. You might consider the new Nikon 70-200 VRII with this converter.
Click to expand...

i'm glad you posted this. I've been considering a similar set up but I keep coming across reviews claiming the 1.7x TC is a better fit, faster focus and IQ than the 2.0x TC and a lot of complaints about the 2.0x. Is it because they're referring to the older 2.0x or do you think it has to do with the camera body in question? And just to be sure, which TC are you using that is a new one?
TIA
Dave
 
Top