500mm - Eeeek

[MattUK]

Oh. I've just seen that lens is about two grand!! I think that's stretching my budget a bit too far plus it has no optical stabilisation?

[OldBoy]

Originally Posted by MattUK

Oh. I've just seen that lens is about two grand!! I think that's stretching my budget a bit too far plus it has no optical stabilisation?

It has OS.

[karenoliver]

Originally Posted by OldBoy

The Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 weighs more at 2.6kg plus the weight of you camera takes it over 3kg.

I am used to lugging weight around, my rucksack weighs a ton with all my gear and I think you generally get used to a heavy camera if you use it enough. Anyway, the lens is on hold for now, I bought a cross trainer yesterday instead lol

Karen

[karenoliver]

Originally Posted by MattUK

Oh. I've just seen that lens is about two grand!! I think that's stretching my budget a bit too far plus it has no optical stabilisation?

You can pick it up new on Amazon for around £1500 and it does have OS. It also retains full autofocus when using extenders. Potentially you could be shooting at 600mm at f5.6 or even more if you are using a crop sensor.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sigma-120-30...1241710&sr=1-1

The above is the Canon version but presumably they do the Nikon around the same price.

Karen

[MattUK]

Looks like that price is a one-off for Canon only - all other prices are £2k plus

After some further research, I see that there was a non-OS version of the lens, hence the price difference.

So the question is:

Would this lens with a 1.4x converter be better quality than the Sigma 50-500mm?

And

Would this lens with a 2.0x converter be better quality than the Sigma 50-500mm?

[amk1977]

Get one of these Matt....



Only £14'000 from Jessops. You wouldn't need to carry your camera - you could just carry the lens with the camera attached

[MattUK]

I've seen that - it's certainly subtle and light-weight

[karenoliver]

Originally Posted by MattUK

Looks like that price is a one-off for Canon only - all other prices are £2k plus

After some further research, I see that there was a non-OS version of the lens, hence the price difference.

So the question is:

Would this lens with a 1.4x converter be better quality than the Sigma 50-500mm?

And

Would this lens with a 2.0x converter be better quality than the Sigma 50-500mm?

The reviews on the 120-300 are really good, particularly amongst wildlife photographers. Anyway, I found this :

http://www.pbase.com/a040591/test_tele

Karen

[karenoliver]

Originally Posted by amk1977

Get one of these Matt....



Only £14'000 from Jessops. You wouldn't need to carry your camera - you could just carry the lens with the camera attached

lol, it looks more like a missile launcher! :-)

Karen

[Cathus]

I know a lot of aircraft photographers really rate the 120-300 2.8 & the quality is much better than the 50-500. A couple of years ago you could get one for £1300 until all the prices shot up