Advise on Sigma 100-300 F4 EX IF HSM


Status
Not open for further replies.

Composition

Member
Sep 18, 2003
332
2
18
Can fellow clubsnappers who owns the Sigma 100-300 F4 EX IF HSM
share their experience of using this lens.

Pricewise (~$1.5K) is very attractive compare to the AFS 70-200 F2.8 VR + AF-S TC-14E (~$3.4K).

Have read very good reports on this Sigma, but appreciate feedback from fellow users here before I make the $$ decision.
 

2100

Senior Member
Mar 3, 2004
3,589
0
0
51
If you are comparing price wise, why not use Sigma 120-300/2.8 for comparison? Anyway, even then it's like comparing on different grounds.
 

glennyong

Senior Member
May 2, 2004
5,588
0
36
Singapore
both equally good.. i think if i am given a choice.. i would go for the 120-300 f2.8..... i think i wouldnt mind paying the extra for that monster.. haha..
 

Composition

Member
Sep 18, 2003
332
2
18
The 120-300 f2.8 monster weighs 2.6kg versus the 100-300 f4 which weighs 1.5kg.

How much is the 120-300 f2.8 anyway ?
 

2100

Senior Member
Mar 3, 2004
3,589
0
0
51
Composition said:
The 120-300 f2.8 monster weighs 2.6kg versus the 100-300 f4 which weighs 1.5kg.

How much is the 120-300 f2.8 anyway ?
Aiyah, both also need at least a monopod if you intend to shoot for more than 5mins. :)

Think it's ard 3k+ new.
 

Composition

Member
Sep 18, 2003
332
2
18
I usually bring my Gitzo CF monopod where ever I go. So another reason why I don't fancy paying $$$ for VR function.

But I need some advice on the 100-300 f4 regarding focussing speed, sharpness, color, image quality etc before I plonk in my hardearned money for it
 

Bluestrike

New Member
Jan 17, 2002
4,784
0
0
44
There lor~
bluestrike.clubsnap.org
Composition said:
I usually bring my Gitzo CF monopod where ever I go. So another reason why I don't fancy paying $$$ for VR function.

But I need some advice on the 100-300 f4 regarding focussing speed, sharpness, color, image quality etc before I plonk in my hardearned money for it
I own the EF mount version of it. I find the AF speed relatively fast. Sharpness is there at 300/4. Click on this link to see the rest.
 

2100

Senior Member
Mar 3, 2004
3,589
0
0
51
Composition said:
I usually bring my Gitzo CF monopod where ever I go. So another reason why I don't fancy paying $$$ for VR function.
Hey, you and I are tuned to the same freq.... :)

Wah, monopod also needs CF. A 600g aluminum 45cm long one when fully kept is good enough for me.

Here's something which i found, look at the bottom of the page.
http://www.lightreflection.com/lenstests/lenstests.htm
 

Composition

Member
Sep 18, 2003
332
2
18
Once you have use a CF monopod, you will never touch an aluminium one ever again.

Let us not digress here, discussion is on the 100-300 f4. Need to hear from 1st hand experience users here.
 

glennyong

Senior Member
May 2, 2004
5,588
0
36
Singapore
2100 said:
Aiyah, both also need at least a monopod if you intend to shoot for more than 5mins. :)

Think it's ard 3k+ new.
hahahha.. yeah.. a monopod.. if not.. yur hands can be long enough to learn Mantis Stance... haahha but need long legs too. hahhahaa...
 

glennyong

Senior Member
May 2, 2004
5,588
0
36
Singapore
since its a HSM... i stil thinks that it cannot be compared to Nikon's VR... Nikon has its own AFS, so i think in terms of AF speeds and stuffs.. it will seems like Nikon is stil better... cuz i they will have to make ur lenses worth $3.5k before putting that price rite ? there should be a reason for that price.. and that price is.... $3.5k worth of tech tech mechanisms, huge tanks of glasses and~~ a tripod collar... hahaha :sweatsm:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.