“Drop-in filters that cost very little”? I wanna try whatever you have been smoking.
jerboa
December 8, 2022 1:04 pm
so I’m also a nikon user. yes, the directions are different, if you are too sensitive or too inflexible for it, you should leave it and buy nikon… oh, there is nothing comparable from nikon? then why are you whining like that?
at the-digital-picture there are clear differences at the edges and in the middle. gwegner compares them with the nikon 300 and sees both in the center almost the same, even with the aperture wide open and the sample photos prove that…
something is not right.
Zoltan Dobo
August 7, 2018 4:34 pm
No you can not. I think nikon body can hold 1 offset for a lens. So basically you fine tune for 1 particular focal and favorite distance. With docking you can set up multiple focal and for each focal 3 different distance. Huge difference on my sigma c 150-600 was front focusing at short and back focusing on longest end. – still i couldn’t fine tune it even with the docker. everything further than 10 meters was detail-less mess.
john gallagher
March 2, 2018 8:23 am
I,ve read this review a few times now and it does not sell the lens well. I don,t know about defective lenses being used, but I do get the user interface annoyance, and feel it is a fair point to raise. I have purchased this lens as a used item, with the intent of it replacing my Nikon 70-200 f4 and my 300 f2.8 AIS. I will start trialling it very soon, to assess if it is a keeper in the kit bag. I feel it is a good value for money lens and very versatile, 200mm is for me just a little short in focal length, and I know I have lost nice captures due to the limitation. I have read the review of the Sigma 120-300mm on Natural Art Images, where it has been field tested and I like the reports back on it. It was these reports and a good value, used model asking price that encouraged my purchase.
Mabeat
October 27, 2017 2:16 am
I really think you had a poor copy of this lens. I have it on a D810 and D500 and it’s incredibly sharp wide open, I had the previous OS version, and it was slightly softer. The Sport version for me is basically as sharp in the center at F2.8 as at F4. I could see a difference on the OS version. I remember seeing a comparison with the 300 F2.8 VR II and the center was equally sharp, corners not as much of course but they are still very good to me.
I really think it is sharper than my 400F2.8G wide open in the center, it must catch up at F3.5, and it’s absolutely perfect at F4. Handling is not so much a problem for me but I can understand some people have problems.
Campbell Sinclair
September 9, 2017 3:04 am
Just read this review now. I find it funny you throw a teleconverter on the Sigma then compare it to Nikons 200-400mm and say the Nikon beats it. Of course it does,. Teleconverters and zooms just dont go together that well. Your criticism of the handling is a bit off. Its a sport lens and not really for hauling over rocks in a national park.
Joe T
January 10, 2017 3:36 pm
Robert O’Toole has been used Sigma lens for his wildlife work including this 150-300 mm f/2.8 lens. Major takeaway from his blogs is versatility of these zoom lenses that allowed him to obtain excellent images in challenging conditions. At the same time, I take Nasim’s reviews and thoughts seriously. Perhaps he has a poor copy and that is always a QA issue with 3rd party lens manufacturers. As others have noted here, the flexibility to zoom-and-shoot on the go is a real fun experience.
Jakes
October 17, 2015 8:52 am
I have held of buying this lens due to this review, however, I recently reg an article about one of the top safari operators innAfrica CNP, and saw that Lou Coetzer who is a Nikon Ambassador and is a World renounce Wildlife and Nature photographer, use the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 Sport with the TC 1.4 and TC 2.0 as his second lens on a D800 or D4, his other 2 lenses are the Nikon 400 f2.8 and 600 f4. I contacted Him about his decision to use the Sigma and not the Nikon 200-400f4, In short, he regard it as the most underrated lenses on the market, and he prefer it to the Nikon. Due to focus and IQ,, I then rented this lens, Sigma ensured that the lens was properly calibrated with my D810 and I tested it with the TC 1.4 and 2.0 as it is the same that I use for my 300 f2.8 vr2. I walked away from a week testing this lens side by side with my 300f2.8 and a New Nikon 200-500f5.6. As I shoot wildlife here innAfrica from a vehicle, Lens flexibility is a very big plus. After 3 days I only used the Sigma, there was no need to stop down the lens to increase sharpness, I never felt at a loss for my Nikonn300 f2.8,
I would like to recommend that when you review a camera or lens, stop comparing apples and pears. This lens is fantastic and produce outstanding results, The Nikon 300 f2.8 vr2 is a fantastic lens but prime lenses have a limitation Ito flexibility, and if that is a major criteria for your work, for the price the results are as good and shot over distance better than the Nikon 200-400f4 that cost 2x more.
Jim B
August 27, 2015 4:37 pm
I take Nasim’s reviews and thoughts with a great deal of consideration. I think this review is probably right on the money and the data shows the actual findings in addition to his opinions.
Now – I did buy the “Sport” version used for around $2400 (doubtful most can find one that cheap anywhere right now). I have had the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 VR (v1) and for shooting sports at night under the lights it was great but just like any prime it’s not very flexible for action coming at you moving out of the frame. Ultimate it was too much reach that caused a lot of missed shots due to players moving out of the frame or more accurately – taking up the entire frame. A second body coupled with a 70-200 solves this easily but I don’t want to or need to carry two bodies right now.
Looking at the lenses the Sigma 120-300 was compared to here as well there is a huge cost difference. The 300mm F/2.8 VR2 retails and lists for around $5900 USD. The 200-400 f/4 lists at $8400 USD. The Sigma at $3600 (new) is a bargain in comparison to these two lenses for what I believe is a marginal (not significant) drop in IQ and focus speed depending on your aperture.
I would have gotten the older OS version of this lens if I didn’t get a great price on the newer model, no question about it. The customization and firmware updating is nice but most of the tuning can be done in the body aside from the focus speed. It is a bit heavy but all the more reason to not skip gym days – when I get older I will opt for the monopod =)
As always thanks for the review Nasim – much appreciated that you continue to provide valuable resources for us all to enjoy and evaluate to come to our own conclusions on where to spend our money and how to shoot.
I agree completely. Looking at my fellow photographers next to me with 2 bodys, switching when the action is close, the Sigma is very versatile. My second boy is behind the goal with a remote trigger on it.
John Gilmore
January 9, 2015 12:54 am
Hi Nasim,
Great in depth review. Have you ever tried the Sigma 300mm F2.8 on Nikon? I’m wondering how it performs wide open, especially on converters. On paper it seems like a great lens with a 2x converter, depending on the AF speed and accuracy. Cheers
“Drop-in filters that cost very little”? I wanna try whatever you have been smoking.
so I’m also a nikon user. yes, the directions are different, if you are too sensitive or too inflexible for it, you should leave it and buy nikon… oh, there is nothing comparable from nikon? then why are you whining like that?
at the-digital-picture there are clear differences at the edges and in the middle. gwegner compares them with the nikon 300 and sees both in the center almost the same, even with the aperture wide open and the sample photos prove that…
something is not right.
No you can not. I think nikon body can hold 1 offset for a lens. So basically you fine tune for 1 particular focal and favorite distance. With docking you can set up multiple focal and for each focal 3 different distance. Huge difference on my sigma c 150-600 was front focusing at short and back focusing on longest end. – still i couldn’t fine tune it even with the docker. everything further than 10 meters was detail-less mess.
I,ve read this review a few times now and it does not sell the lens well.
I don,t know about defective lenses being used, but I do get the user interface annoyance, and feel it is a fair point to raise.
I have purchased this lens as a used item, with the intent of it replacing my Nikon 70-200 f4 and my 300 f2.8 AIS.
I will start trialling it very soon, to assess if it is a keeper in the kit bag.
I feel it is a good value for money lens and very versatile, 200mm is for me just a little short in focal length, and I know I have lost nice captures due to the limitation.
I have read the review of the Sigma 120-300mm on Natural Art Images, where it has been field tested and I like the reports back on it.
It was these reports and a good value, used model asking price that encouraged my purchase.
I really think you had a poor copy of this lens.
I have it on a D810 and D500 and it’s incredibly sharp wide open, I had the previous OS version, and it was slightly softer.
The Sport version for me is basically as sharp in the center at F2.8 as at F4. I could see a difference on the OS version.
I remember seeing a comparison with the 300 F2.8 VR II and the center was equally sharp, corners not as much of course but they are still very good to me.
I really think it is sharper than my 400F2.8G wide open in the center, it must catch up at F3.5, and it’s absolutely perfect at F4.
Handling is not so much a problem for me but I can understand some people have problems.
Just read this review now. I find it funny you throw a teleconverter on the Sigma then compare it to Nikons 200-400mm and say the Nikon beats it. Of course it does,. Teleconverters and zooms just dont go together that well. Your criticism of the handling is a bit off. Its a sport lens and not really for hauling over rocks in a national park.
Robert O’Toole has been used Sigma lens for his wildlife work including this 150-300 mm f/2.8 lens. Major takeaway from his blogs is versatility of these zoom lenses that allowed him to obtain excellent images in challenging conditions. At the same time, I take Nasim’s reviews and thoughts seriously. Perhaps he has a poor copy and that is always a QA issue with 3rd party lens manufacturers. As others have noted here, the flexibility to zoom-and-shoot on the go is a real fun experience.
I have held of buying this lens due to this review, however, I recently reg an article about one of the top safari operators innAfrica CNP, and saw that Lou Coetzer who is a Nikon Ambassador and is a World renounce Wildlife and Nature photographer, use the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 Sport with the TC 1.4 and TC 2.0 as his second lens on a D800 or D4, his other 2 lenses are the Nikon 400 f2.8 and 600 f4. I contacted Him about his decision to use the Sigma and not the Nikon 200-400f4, In short, he regard it as the most underrated lenses on the market, and he prefer it to the Nikon. Due to focus and IQ,, I then rented this lens, Sigma ensured that the lens was properly calibrated with my D810 and I tested it with the TC 1.4 and 2.0 as it is the same that I use for my 300 f2.8 vr2. I walked away from a week testing this lens side by side with my 300f2.8 and a New Nikon 200-500f5.6. As I shoot wildlife here innAfrica from a vehicle, Lens flexibility is a very big plus. After 3 days I only used the Sigma, there was no need to stop down the lens to increase sharpness, I never felt at a loss for my Nikonn300 f2.8,
I would like to recommend that when you review a camera or lens, stop comparing apples and pears. This lens is fantastic and produce outstanding results, The Nikon 300 f2.8 vr2 is a fantastic lens but prime lenses have a limitation Ito flexibility, and if that is a major criteria for your work, for the price the results are as good and shot over distance better than the Nikon 200-400f4 that cost 2x more.
I take Nasim’s reviews and thoughts with a great deal of consideration. I think this review is probably right on the money and the data shows the actual findings in addition to his opinions.
Now – I did buy the “Sport” version used for around $2400 (doubtful most can find one that cheap anywhere right now). I have had the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 VR (v1) and for shooting sports at night under the lights it was great but just like any prime it’s not very flexible for action coming at you moving out of the frame. Ultimate it was too much reach that caused a lot of missed shots due to players moving out of the frame or more accurately – taking up the entire frame. A second body coupled with a 70-200 solves this easily but I don’t want to or need to carry two bodies right now.
Looking at the lenses the Sigma 120-300 was compared to here as well there is a huge cost difference. The 300mm F/2.8 VR2 retails and lists for around $5900 USD. The 200-400 f/4 lists at $8400 USD. The Sigma at $3600 (new) is a bargain in comparison to these two lenses for what I believe is a marginal (not significant) drop in IQ and focus speed depending on your aperture.
I would have gotten the older OS version of this lens if I didn’t get a great price on the newer model, no question about it. The customization and firmware updating is nice but most of the tuning can be done in the body aside from the focus speed. It is a bit heavy but all the more reason to not skip gym days – when I get older I will opt for the monopod =)
As always thanks for the review Nasim – much appreciated that you continue to provide valuable resources for us all to enjoy and evaluate to come to our own conclusions on where to spend our money and how to shoot.
I agree completely. Looking at my fellow photographers next to me with 2 bodys, switching when the action is close, the Sigma is very versatile. My second boy is behind the goal with a remote trigger on it.
Hi Nasim,
Great in depth review. Have you ever tried the Sigma 300mm F2.8 on Nikon? I’m wondering how it performs
wide open, especially on converters. On paper it seems like a great lens with a 2x converter, depending on the AF speed and accuracy.
Cheers
John