[Yakim]

[quote name='simon_k' timestamp='1308216711' post='9287']

I tested it in the shop and outside where it was quite bright (about 1/500 to 1/1000s at f/2.8 and ISO200).

I guess the size of the lens elements is just too much for the motor. The 70-200 has the same problem. It's not slow but compared to the fastest Canon lenses Sigma should be ashamed of their work.



What I forgot to mention was the OS - it takes a second or so to work but the it is amazingly good. I managed to get shots at 300mm and 1/30s. You have to pixel-peep to see a slight blur.

[/quote]



10X for the info.

[miro]

Lenstip just tested the lens. It seems to suffer from severe glare/flare problems.

Another issues which is a little bit confusing for me is that lens doesn't like 1,4x converter.

This two issues makes me to thing about used canon 300/2,8 non IS.

[popo]

While I still haven't used my 120-300 OS all that much yet, I haven't run into any issues with flare yet. Certainly nothing to suggest it is as bad as the worst lens I've used in that regard, the 70-300 DO. Also from my limited use, wide open is slightly soft with the Sigma 1.4x or 2x fitted, but all improve noticeably one stop down where it is decent.



I also had the old Canon 300mm f/2.8 non-IS previously, and for reasons I never understood the vignetting on that was unusually bad on crop sensor. I think overall the image quality is a bit better wide open, with or without TC.

[miro]

Thanks for the input.