|
| sent on 26 Agosto 2019
Pros: Price to be a 300 2.8 with even the lower focal points, all-metal egregious construction, set with wide freedom via USB dock, all in all balanced
Cons: Image quality far from fixed 300 2.8, AF incomparable to fixed 300 2.8, scary focus breathing, unusable filters (there is no drawer for filters near the bayonet )
Opinion: We assume that as usual reviews are done with your feet. The lens has no "great sharpness" either in the center, let alone at the edges of F2.8. It's not shoddy for charity, but far from a 300 2.8 (Nikon or Canon doesn't matter). The guy who can't mount the lampshade should read the instructions. It is perhaps one of the best Sigma, being yes all metal, but having a double hooking system: first you have to "snap" spring, and then you have to tighten a screw (classic supertele screw ). Of course, if you just screw the screw, fall. Macchinoso all for charity, however in the end makes the lampshade on the lens and without unwanted reflections (to put it mildly the various 500 f4 Nikon of the past and the like had a gap between body and lampshade, this does not ). It should be noted that the optical scheme is the same as the old non-Sport version, so the problem of focus breathing remained (at 300mm at the minimum distance of MF is kind of a 150mm, well). The AF is absurdly MINUS VELOCE of 150-600 sports. Both docked on speed priority, the zoommone is faster. This has a little bit of a fuss, I have to confess that I expected more. Of course, you must not forget that you have in your hands a 300 2.8 with the possibility of "getting away" up to 120mm, at a price practically low compared to the counterpart. In fact, a good 300 2.8 of the Nikon-Canon home will cost us at least twice as much. In the used something can be found at the same price, but always overused and with the possibility that it will leave us at any moment. I recommend it to anyone who makes indoor sports photography or absolutely needs to stretch the focal point compared to a classic 70-200, as long as it has an easel. Freehand I doubt you can photograph with this beast for more than 30 minutes (despite the excellent stabilizer). In money, taken used on the 2000-2500 has its because, new to 4000 frankly loses sense, and I would prefer it a 300 2.8 used. Not recommended on Sony, used on the A9 has a very slow hook, in my opinion not exploitable in work contexts. Once hooked it does not lose fire, but you have to hook... |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
![[editors pick]](shared_files/layout/ep_badge.jpg){kind=icon}
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
