Thomas wrote:Well, today was the day to decide whether the Sigma 120-400mm is a keeper for me or not.
I really was not so sure after publishing the results from the OS-efficiency test. Although the OS was not that great the lens still had some impressive resolution under ideal conditions and it was a zoom which made it much more flexible than my 400mm fixed-focal.
But upon further investigation of the best testshots @400mm from the shake/blur-test (=5 stars only!) I came across some really nasty sharpness drop-off when looking at the borders, even at f/8.0
Those were in the order of a drop to 2-star sharpness and much uglier than compared to the slight drop-off the fixed-focal produced at the borders. And I am not even talking about corners or the results such a lens will produce on a high-res FF/FX body (shudder!).
This effect is clearly less pronounced at shorter focal lengths, but as I want this lens for 400mm performance I have now finally decided to send it back and stay with my fixed-focal
duber3 wrote:Hi Thomas
I've read the entire review of the sigma 120-400 and I have a couple of question, sorry to PM you but the review is a little bit old this is why I PM you.
OK I have a Sony Alpha 300 with the 2 kit lens (18-70 and 75-300)
I would like to buy a 400mm lens, my choice stoped on the sigma 120-400, after reading the review I'm really not sure this will be a good choice, you said the OS is not that good and cause bad pics, the Sony have the image stabilisation inside the body so I think this will not be and issue, otherwise I really don't know which lens to buy, Sony have a new one 70-400 but way too expensive, do you any suggestion
have a nice day
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest