# used 300 f2.8 IS or new sigma 120-300 f2.8



## dash2k8 (Sep 23, 2014)

Hi guys, I saw a used Canon 300mm f/2.8 IS (mark I) going for $3500. The Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 (new S version) is slightly cheaper. I need the 300mm reach at f2.8 (already have a 70-200mm f2.8, but with TC it becomes f4) so the ability to zoom on the Sigma doesn't really matter.

The Canon is older but the image quality is obviously a little better being a prime.
The Sigma is newer and will save me some money, but there's a little bit less sharpness at the edges. (Vignetting can be corrected in post so I don't mind that.)

I regularly print medium-sized prints (anywhere between A3+ to A2) so IQ is somewhat important (most regular clients can't tell the difference, they just like bright colors and great expressions). I guess the main question is, should I pay more for an OLD lens with slightly better IQ, or should I pay less for a newer lens and suffer a tad in IQ? Am I paying $500 more for a $20 difference in visual results? Thanks guys!


----------



## ichetov (Sep 23, 2014)

Go for 300MkI. I tried both, and there is quite a bit extra IQ from the Canon. The difference is even more pronounced with 1.4x extender...


----------



## danny300 (Sep 23, 2014)

good post........


____________________
danny


----------



## FEBS (Sep 23, 2014)

danny300 said:


> good post........
> 
> 
> ____________________
> danny



Welcome on CR Danny


----------



## dash2k8 (Sep 23, 2014)

ichetov said:


> Go for 300MkI. I tried both, and there is quite a bit extra IQ from the Canon. The difference is even more pronounced with 1.4x extender...



Thanks for the reply and suggestion. I will go for the Canon model.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Sep 23, 2014)

dash2k8 said:


> ichetov said:
> 
> 
> > Go for 300MkI. I tried both, and there is quite a bit extra IQ from the Canon. The difference is even more pronounced with 1.4x extender...
> ...



I have one myself - you won't regret this decision. 
I often use mine with a Canon 2 x Mk3 extender, whist it is not as good as a 600 F4, it makes a very portable and high quality 600mm.


----------



## jdramirez (Sep 23, 2014)

Mind if I throw in a curve ball into the mix? I've been thinking about a 200L f2. Which is a 280 f2.8... and a 400 f4...with extenders. 

I too have thought about the 300mm, but the 200 seems more flexible with the added stop. Thoughts?


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 23, 2014)

jdramirez said:


> Mind if I throw in a curve ball into the mix? I've been thinking about a 200L f2. Which is a 280 f2.8... and a 400 f4...with extenders.
> 
> I too have thought about the 300mm, but the 200 seems more flexible with the added stop. Thoughts?


 
Size, weight and cost are about same between the two. Which is more important for you JD - reach or 1stop extra. Although I haven't try 200mm f2 with x1.4 yet, but I have feeling it can't win the bare 300mm f2.8 IS II in term of IQ.

I can do some test shots and share with you on 200mm f2 + 1.4x TC III later this week


----------



## kaihp (Sep 23, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> Although I haven't try 200mm f2 with x1.4 yet, but I have feeling it can't win the bare 300mm f2.8 IS II in term of IQ.



TDP agrees with you:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=739&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=458&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

Let us know how the f/2L trial works out for you


----------



## stochasticmotions (Sep 23, 2014)

I own the previous version of the sigma 120-300 and while it is an excellent lens, very sharp for a zoom lens and can handle the teleconverters reasonably well I would definitely go for the canon 300 if the cost was anywhere near close. Unless you really need the zoom, the prime would be my choice.


----------



## barracuda (Sep 24, 2014)

Hate to throw you another curve ball, but a refurbished version of an older version of the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG OS APO HSM (Mfr# 136101 vs. the newer 137101) is available at Sigma's outlet store for $1999.

https://www.sigmaphoto.com/product/120-300mm-f28-ex-dg-os-apo-hsm-refurbished

I'm not familiar with the differences between the two lenses, so can't say how IQ compares.


----------



## jdramirez (Sep 24, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> jdramirez said:
> 
> 
> > Mind if I throw in a curve ball into the mix? I've been thinking about a 200L f2. Which is a 280 f2.8... and a 400 f4...with extenders.
> ...



You made the deal for all three lenses. kudos.


----------



## dash2k8 (Sep 24, 2014)

Appreciate all the feedback, guys! ;D The Canon for sure now.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 24, 2014)

dash2k8 said:


> Appreciate all the feedback, guys! ;D The Canon for sure now.



Good choice


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 24, 2014)

jdramirez said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > jdramirez said:
> ...



No, local camera deal didn't go through. Went with CPW-street price on 200mm f2. Received the lens yesterday. One word "AWESOME".

16-35 f4 IS and 35mm(might go with Sigma Art) are next.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 27, 2014)

jdramirez said:


> Mind if I throw in a curve ball into the mix? I've been thinking about a 200L f2. Which is a 280 f2.8... and a 400 f4...with extenders.
> 
> I too have thought about the 300mm, but the 200 seems more flexible with the added stop. Thoughts?



JD, here are some photos with 200mm f2 + 1.4x TC III. 

These are raw, straight convert through LR5 with lens profile correction, minor adjustments in highlight & shadow etc...+25 in sharpness. 10-15 contrast: http://dylannguyen.smugmug.com/Lens-Test/200MM-F2-IS-14X-tc-iii/n-93P6B#!/

These are JPEG, SOOC: http://dylannguyen.smugmug.com/Lens-Test/200mm-f2-IS-14TC-III-JPEG/n-mJcgN#!/


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 27, 2014)

kaihp said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Although I haven't try 200mm f2 with x1.4 yet, but I have feeling it can't win the bare 300mm f2.8 IS II in term of IQ.
> ...



All I can say is awesome


----------



## DanoPhoto (Sep 28, 2014)

Wow! Those are some sweet pix. Thanks for sharing!


----------



## dash2k8 (Oct 8, 2014)

Just wanted to update my status: the 328 has arrived and I couldn't be happier. I thought my other L lenses focused fast before, this thing is miles ahead in terms of speed! Thank you all for your recommendations.


----------



## Canon1 (Oct 8, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> jdramirez said:
> 
> 
> > Mind if I throw in a curve ball into the mix? I've been thinking about a 200L f2. Which is a 280 f2.8... and a 400 f4...with extenders.
> ...



Too bad the bokeh is so bad...


----------



## MrFotoFool (Oct 12, 2014)

dash2k8 said:


> Just wanted to update my status: the 328 has arrived and I couldn't be happier. I thought my other L lenses focused fast before, this thing is miles ahead in terms of speed! Thank you all for your recommendations.



Good choice. Another downside to the Sigma is that it is much shorter than 300mm. I am not sure about the newest version, but the two previous versions were reported to only be about 260mm. (Surprises me they can get away with calling it a 300).


----------



## Snook (Oct 13, 2014)

barracuda said:


> Hate to throw you another curve ball, but a refurbished version of an older version of the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG OS APO HSM (Mfr# 136101 vs. the newer 137101) is available at Sigma's outlet store for $1999.
> 
> https://www.sigmaphoto.com/product/120-300mm-f28-ex-dg-os-apo-hsm-refurbished
> 
> I'm not familiar with the differences between the two lenses, so can't say how IQ compares.



This deal appears to be over now? I am currently looking to purchase the older version of the sigma 120-300, but it appears the sigma outlet store no longer sells it.


----------

