Sigma 300mm f2.8 APO EX DG HSM For Canon Digital & Flim SLR Cameras

Product Information

Now they say the 300 is the least popular and it’s not good enough. It needs to have a TC or be a zoom lens. The Z 400mm f4.5 is 1.25KG or 1.16kg without the tripod foot. That's incredibly light! Its also relatively affordable compared to any current 300mm f2.8 + 1.4x TC.

Sigma 300mm F2.8 APO EX DG HSM: Digital Photography Review Sigma 300mm F2.8 APO EX DG HSM: Digital Photography Review

It seems that Sony is more interested in breaking a weight record and in sleek bump free designs rather than in producing a lens that meets photographers’s needs. We haven't yet reviewed the Sony offering in this category, but it's the most expensive of them all.And second of all you are making that up. You have no objective data to support that claim. And no, nikon marketing materials don’t count With a magnification ratio of just 0.13x and a close-focusing distance of 2.5 meters (over 8 feet), macro users should look elsewhere. Another aspect of this is the message that Sigma is sending to Nikon shooters (I doubt Canon shooters will care). Seems as though they made a decision that it is not particularly important to cater to the Nikon standard. If they wish to be taken seriously by pros and serious amateur photographers, then I wonder why they would take a shortcut like this. Obviously, it is easier and less costly to have just a single configuration, but I think it is a bad move on their part. NIKON D3S + 120-300mm f/2.8 @ 140mm, ISO 1600, 1/1600, f/4.0 I was hoping for something more along the lines of Z400/4.5. Small, light and relatively affordable.

Sigma EX APO DG 300mm F2.8 - Pentax Forums

It’s getting a bit ridiculous now. A 120-300/2.8 would be much more expensive, bigger and heavier lens then your standard 300/2.8 I honestly don’t see many photographers nor newsagencies spending the north of 10k a OM will certainly charge for such a lens in europe. While it has its purposes there reason why so few of these have ever been made. It’s a lens north of 3kg and a seize 1,5x that of DSLR 70-200/2.8. It’s a similar story with the 200-400/4 big, heavy and very costly lenses. These are incredibly niche lenses for sports and neither have ever meant manufacturers could get away with not making a 300/2.8. Portraits with the Sigma 300mm 2.8EX are really interesting. First off, the lens has great compression. Shooting with this lens means you have to be a bit farther away from your subject, giving you a smaller angle of view to work with. You have to realize that you don’t have to shoot at f2.8 to get nice Bokeh. You can get really pleasing bokeh at f4 or f5.6. Your lighting has to be off camera because an on camera flash just will not reach. Simple natural light portraits come out very nice, particularly if the sun is in front of the subject. Image Quality The tech is there; if a relatively small company like Nikon can do it, then certainly much larger companies like Sony and Canon can do it as well.Well to make things even more clear for you the generation E FL started with the 400mm f2.8 E FL and ended with the 120-300mm f2.8. That generation did not include a 300mm f2.8. Those lenses were around 900gr heavier than corresponding Canon/Sony lenses. So no, Nikon didn’t know/want to make lighter super teles at the time. After i get it fixed i will sell it and all my pentax gear. The pentax is a good product but lens and such are not where it should be compared to Nikon and Cannon. These two top brands have outlets in almost every country and very easily fixed and serviced. It is a shame Pentax has let there market share drop to a point where it is just not practical to own there product. especially for someone who travel extensivly... Detailed specifications for the teleconverter can be found in our lens database. Lens Compatibility