Great Forum...I am having this exact dilemma, I just purchased the 70-300G, however I can't seem to get a usable pictures in low light situations, this weekend I was shooting at an indoor sporting arena( soccer ) I had to turn up the ISO so high that I found that I can't keep any pics, I am now debating returning the lens for a Sigma 70-200 2.8, and I feel as though I will be making a further mistake. Deep down I know I should get the Sony 70-200 2.8 but I can't seem too justify the cost considering I am still an amateur. Help...…
Well, I started out as a... well self-conceited noob, and after fiddling around several long lenses - KM 70-210 f4 and tokina 80-200 f2.8, I decided I shouldn't beat around the bush too much, and just settle on what the best the mount can offer... buying then selling can usually make you lose a bit of cash everytime you let go of lenses (unless you are a patient seller)...
Anyway, a high performance lens at least takes the equipment part of the bottle neck away from the photography equation, and you can concentrate better on taking good photos and possibly learn faster and better.
Well, that's how I saw it, so after fiddling around a bit, I just went all out to buy the best lenses the mount can offer me - in the process of doing so, I got struck with epiphany that it's the Cameraman that ultimately mattered - at least I'm no longer that conceited about my photographic abilities (one that can make me put the blame on the equipment if the shot didn't turn out well because now, I can't fault the equipment for the lousy photos) So the side effect of having the best equipment is probably that sense of epiphany that makes me work harder... like "okay, I got the best equipment on offer, I still sucked... time to buck up yeah..." I've got a gut feeling that if I change mount out of frustration, I'd still suck if I changed to Nikon, Canon, Pentax or Oly... hehe :bsmilie:
So well, I call that a $5000 dollar lesson (A700+VG + 70-200G SSM). :sweatsm:
So to spend or not, it's up to you - in conclusion, expensive equipment can take the equipment bottle neck away and can help you significantly, but be mindful - that at the same time, photographer skill is the biggest factor in taking good photos - even in difficult situations - a good photographer can do fantastic stuff with lousy equipment (there are a lot of A100, 350D, D40 shooters on DeviantArt and elsewhere that makes photos that looked so good that you'd want to slam your expensive camera on the floor in disgust - oh well, that's how I felt - a bit "emo", but it does feel that way... hehe)
How much to spend - how much to invest - is up to how committed you are to photography. If you think that you are going to practice photography for the rest of your life... and getting the best lenses is only a matter of time... why wait? Being new doesn't mean that you can't make good use of those (G)ood lenses from the beginning of it yeah.
does anyone have any indoor sports shots either taken with the Sigma or Sony 70-200G 2.8?