the Canon appears to have rounder softer bokeh and backgrounds, But the sigma is prolly the best you can get for a 100-300 zoom at its price point. No one would ever call you out or be able to tell you werent shooting a with a canon prime
Hello! I have bot tried with the R6, but definitely have with the R5, and i love the results. I made another video comparing both lenses again but using the r5.
I AM surprised how close the 2 are. I think there is a very very little more sharpness/contrast from the Sigma. But being so close I think the Sigma is a clear winner because it is a zoom. Thank you for a good video.
Bit late on this vid, but anyway ... I had both of these big guys from new. The Canon 300 was the go to one for just about everything as time went on. The Sigma was sharp until it got up into the 200 range Nice as it was I let it go in the end as it wasnt being used much after a year. Now I run with the 70-200 MK2 300MK3 with either the 2x or 1.4x extenders. And a 24-70 - 16 -35 - both 2.8 100 macro It all depends on what suits you and how much money you have to save to get there.
Well i see more diffused bokeh on canon which when i see the frame i find canon is tighter...i dont know if u changed distance or this could be from focus breathing on sigma because of the framing..eitherways both look great but certainly.i see more bokeh on canon as it maybe on a true 300mm focal length
I know I am late to the party but year, big difference in zoom. Focus breathing or the sigma is not a true 300mm the canon zoomed in way more say 250mm to 300mm on the canon ???
Cool comparison! For the 1st and 3rd looks I could barely see any difference, both lenses seemed to have similar sharpness and bokeh quality. But the 2nd look (blue outfit in front of the bridge) I can definitely notice the smoother bokeh on the Canon. The model seems to be closer on the Canon - if you shot both lenses from the same position with the model not moving forward I guess that's focus breathing on the Sigma. The bokeh on the Sigma seems just as nice as the Canon on the other shots so I wonder if the lack of focus breathing on the Canon is what improves the the bokeh quality by getting in closer to the subject, or whether it just deals better with busier backgrounds anyway. With the bonus look those bokeh balls seem a lot bigger on the Canon shot where the model is framed tighter so maybe that focus breathing really does affect the bokeh a lot. Sigma is fantastic value though and zoom versatility is great. I guess if you're a professional and/or are shooting at 300mm most of the time you'd go for the Canon even if just for the lack of focus breathing, if you make your money from photography or are a well-off enthusiast and photography is your #1 hobby and you already spend a lot travelling, doing safaris etc. then the extra cost is worth it. Being more budget limited I'd go for the Sigma. Would be cool if Sigma make a new 120-300 for mirrorless cameras like Sony E mount, if they just fix that breathing they'd have a very popular lens! Btw I love the model's hair in the bonus look. Was it her natural hair styled or a wig?
They are both great lenses: but i must say: in mid 2019 i went to a safari in Namibia: and the sigma was more useful than the canon. Often times we had to park our cars in particular places and not move: sometimes 300mm was too close for the composition i wanted. Switching to the 120-300 was far more versatile.
The canon is definitely sharper, but the sigma offers versatility: its a hard choice: however, i will soon start shooting with both more often because i will sell one of them.
@@FranklinLiranzo is it the mk2 300mm canon you have? i was looking at old mk1 canon lens or get sigma one u have so i have it to use for range also if getting used to you know best way to test lens as if get either of them i maybe able to collect. have you ever used Panasonic m43 stuff as well ? they have a 200mm f2.8 lens which is 400mm
That is true!! So i cant see many people justifying the additional cost of canon. I love shooting telephoto lenses: for the compression, the look, to “erase distractions”, and because i photograph events.
Sigma seems to be a lot sharper with a little more detail. This wasn't as noticeable on Yvonne as it was in the background. Canon's depth of field seemed to blur the background more while Sigma retained more detail. I'm sure you can change camera settings to adjust these things but by default as you used them, this is what i noticed.
Great Video, great comparison, the last outfit is also amazing. I am still hesitating over the Sigma 105, Canon 200mm and Canon 300mm . Btw my favourite focal lenght is 85mm but I want to push myself out of the box a bit :)
Hey Richard, im glad you enjoyed the video: i own the sigma 105 f1.4: and its a really nice lens (more so for portraits). The 200 at f2 is a fantastic lens: however, as of now i cant justify spending all that money for .8 difference... i much prefer to keep the 70-200mm 2.8. Now the 300mm along with a teleconverter: its great for extra reach! And like you i also love the 85mm (see my latest video on the 85). Right not my three fave lenses are the 85, 135, and 300. :-) 😊
Richard Budai absolutely!! The term is called focus breathing: where a lens maybe shorter or longer than what is supposed to be: but apparently that can be fixed based on the distance: subject to lens. Either way, i do prefer how sharp the canon is :-) 😊
@@FranklinLiranzo Hey, So I have ended up with the Sigma 104mm 1.4 art and the Canon 300mm 2.8 IS mk1. I was coming back to this video every other week and finally pulled the trigger. Thanks a lot for putting the work in!
At this time Im deciding between exactly these lenses and im glad I found this video...It seems the prime does a better job on the details, but the zoom ... zooms...making it more flexible.. Im not shooting models, but i will use it for airshows and some wildlife.. Maybe you are willing to put them side by side on a tripod shooting the same still targets? That would be much appreciated!! Also subscribed to your channel!
Martin Dijkman Dulkes ok Martin i will make sure to put the camera/lenses on tripod and photograph the same subject: you wish to see an object or person?
@@FranklinLiranzo Thats so awesome! Thanks in advance! Perhaps some objects and a person.. ? Im very interested how the Sigma and canon handle fine detail.. also the pricepoint to me is important because I will most probably get it secondhand.. I can't wait to see your results and hear your opinion.. Thumbs up!!
At first i bought the 120-300, but I needed to use microadjust in camera with a setting of-13 and -18 on the lens.. I tried calibrating on 3M and later on 10M. I wasnt happy with how much backfocus correction i had to dial, so I brought it back to the camera store. After getting my money back ,I searched for a secondhand 300mm F2.8 L ( version 1 ) and got it in mint condition..that instead of the near new 120-300S.. After calibrating the lens using software , the pictures are very sharp... Happy with my choice!
Martin Dijkman Dulkes honestly given what you want to photograph - the sigma is definitely a great choice! And definitely more versatile. But keep in mind it is heavy!! Its my heaviest out of 13 lenses that i own. Use a monopod or tripod. :-) 😊 i will make a video soon shooting the same target with a tripod.
The Canon's Bokeh is ever so slightly better and the focal length looks just a little longer, both of which I already anticipated. I can't tell any real difference in sharpness between the two in this test. I have the Sigma myself and am very happy with it but if you own it you need to work out to be able to use it!
unfair comparison between these lenses, you have to do a like for like and that includes model poses, as any change in posture/pose will make a differance in the outcome of the final image. i consider this as a failed attempt to compare 2 great lenses.
I actually feel the same. I preferred the poses with the canon, which skewed my opinion. I own a sigma 120-300 2.8 and love it, but want to see a real side by side with the same poses for each lens. Thanks!
Negative friend… there are techniques used with these lenses, plus years of experience: I certainly did not waste my time. The canon is superior to the sigma. But not by a lot.
