How many versions of the Sigma 120-300mm?

Discussion in 'Sports' started by sascha_richardson, Jan 21, 2014.

  1. Hi everyone,
    I'm looking at buying one, however it doesn't have "DG" or "OS" on it.
    I'm assuming this is the first version? (1999 or so?)
    Can anyone give me more information on this particular lens?
  2. !) As I understand it, it is no longer made.
    2) It's supposed to have the same optical internals .
    3) It has a reputation for not being very reliable and repairs by Sigma may or may not solve the problem.
    I have one of the new model's on my Nikon D3s - use it to shoot High School and Club soccer and I'm very happy with it. Shooting a telephoto at f2.8 can be a little frustrating at first as the depth of field is fairly thin. Appears to be a well-made and very stout lens - finish the USB works as advertised.
    I've owned it about a month and am, so far, very satisfied with it.
  3. I'll tell you my experience - I bought the 2011 introduced model that was out 2 years before being replaced by the new "sports" line that Bill has. I have a friend of mine - pro shooter - who was looking to sell his older version without OS - and let me tell you - it is TACK sharp - I shot it for about a month before deciding to get the one I got - and if I'd have known that it was as good I could have saved $500 - if you can find and older model cheap - get it
  4. I've now used my Sport version for approx. 20 high school soccer games and about the same number of ECNL club soccer games and I'm still very happy with it. I've used it on my D3s with and without the Sigma 1.4 Tele-Converter and while I won't tell you the images are the same quality but they are more than close enough and the added reach makes up for it.
    I've also used it with my D300 again both with and without the Tele-Converter and again I was very satisfied. The increase in "reach" using the DX body makes it 450mm on the long end (and I don't lose a stop) and then add the 1.4 TC and I have 630mm on the long end which allows me to shoot almost the length of a soccer field and still be wide enough (250 mm) when the action comes back to my end of the field,
    I will, depending on the time of day and/or amount of light typically shoot the first half with the D300 and the 2nd half, usually under crappy high school stadium lights with the D3s.
    Is there a drawback to the lens? The only problem I have is it's size and weight and I'm still looking for a better QR plate for my mono-pod. Of course I was born the day Jimmy D. lead a flight of B-25's off a carrier headed West so I'm not as strong or as agile as I used to be.

Share This Page