Sigma 70-300 APO DG + 28-300mm [Archive]

Glen

16-02-2006, 21:27

Hi

I've been looking trade in my Canon 18-55mm Non USM and 55-200mm USM, for either a Sigma 28-300 or 70-300mm. I can get £100 for my 55-200mm from LCE on its own and keep the 18-55mm.

As i'm new to DLSR, could anyone recommend what to go for. The reason behind all this is just for ease of carrying the one lens to cover a wider focal range. I've also got a Sigma 10-20mm which (in my novice hands) I think is superb.

Cheers Glen.

16-02-2006, 22:18

Hiya and welcome! :) I'm just going to move this to Cameras, Lenses and Acessories where you'll get more response. You might still like to do an 'Hello' type post here though. :wave2:

16-02-2006, 22:23

How much are you looking to spend Glen? It gives people a better idea what to suggest. :)

SammyC

17-02-2006, 07:49

Myself, Barrymoor and others have the 70-300. Whilst its a good lens its not a belter in my mind. Basically its great between 70-140, good between 140-220, and reasonable to poor from then on. BUT, it is a very cheap lens for what you get so personally I have no complaints.

Oh, and its not the best at autofocus and can hunt a little in medium light and it will sound like a bag of nails compaired to a proper ring USM motor.

BUT, it is a budget lens so you do get what you pay for.

HTH.

SammyC

17-02-2006, 07:58

Well I had a look here (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-55-200mm-f-4.5-5.6-II-USM-Review.aspx) at your 55-200 so it sounds like its not a proper ring USM but a micro USM.

Sigma will still not compete speed of focus-wise but will probably be sharper.

Glen

17-02-2006, 08:16

Thanks SammyC

What are your thoughts about the 28-300mm, would this be a good option instead of the 70-300mm, or again at the top end would quality tail off to much?

Glen.:)

SammyC

17-02-2006, 08:16

Oh, and now I think of it, unless you've got a grand or two to spare you're always going to be compromising on lots to get a wide focal length range. Which is why SLRs have changable lenses! :)

You might be better off looking for a better replacement for your 55-200 if you are not happy with its performance. I've just bought a 28-105 USM as a walk about lens, much better quality than the 18-55 and 70-300 but still nowhere near L glass sharpness (but then nowhere near L glass price either!) :D

SammyC

17-02-2006, 08:17

BTW, I think the Sigma 10-20mm EX HSM is an excellent lens (the EX tag means quality in Sigma speak).

Glen

17-02-2006, 08:30

Steep

17-02-2006, 09:58

As long as it's the APO version you go for you won't be disappointed Glen.

matty

17-02-2006, 11:12

yeah i would agree there, the APO version of the 70 - 300 is good, if you get a really good one you can do alrighyt, i got lucky...

noah

17-02-2006, 11:30

mine's fine at 300mm as long as you shoot at f8 which is ok for me as i mainly shoot surfing at that length and its tends to be good light. sigma tend to have some quality control issues and some are good examples and some are not. the downside is the AF is very slow and it will hunt all over the place in low light.

Joe T

17-02-2006, 11:53

Thanks again for your help, I think I will go for the 70-300 as it seems quite popular with a few people. Once I find my feet I might think about trading upwards for better quality lenses, but in the meantime, I'm still learning so no point running before I can walk!
You're not thinking of it as a replacement to the kit lens are you? Due to the different focal lengths, it should be compliment to it, not a replacement. :)

Glen

18-02-2006, 11:13

You're not thinking of it as a replacement to the kit lens are you? Due to the different focal lengths, it should be compliment to it, not a replacement. :)
Yes, would this be a mistake to replace 55-200mm?

Joe T

18-02-2006, 12:12

Yes, would this be a mistake to replace 55-200mm?
It would replace the 55-200 just right. :)

SammyC

18-02-2006, 12:56

Glen, the 55-200 is not a good lens. I suspect you know that from comparisons to you 10-20.

BTW, I doubt the 70-300 will be comparable to the 10-20 either in sharpness but it will be much better than the 55-200.

:)

Glen

18-02-2006, 16:59

Thanks for all your help. I've just purcahsed the 70-300 for £85 with my 55-200 as part-ex (£100). Now I just need to get out and real some pics off.

Glen.

Joe T

18-02-2006, 21:13

Thanks for all your help. I've just purcahsed the 70-300 for £85 with my 55-200 as part-ex (£100). Now I just need to get out and real some pics off.

Glen.
Which 70-300 did you get btw?

Glen

19-02-2006, 05:31

The Sigma APO DG version from LCE. Should've been £185.00 but I got £100 for my 55-200 kit lens. I have seen the lens down in the £160 price range but thats without part-ex, so its a bit of give and take.

barrymoir

21-02-2006, 08:27

as said above, i bought the lens last week, and so far am so impressed with it, probably more impressed than the canon i got after using a compact lol. The macro side of lens is absolutely fantastic. the auto focus i found slightly noisey but mainly use manual focus anyway. A little soft at the far ends but aside that im seriously happy with lens and one of the better buys ive made this year.

barrymoir

21-02-2006, 08:34

some examples of macro mode can be found at http://www.barrymoirphotography.co.uk/galleryframes.htm anything closeup if u click on the sweets picture is all taken by the sigma, to give an idea of quality

Glen

21-02-2006, 08:48

Glen

24-02-2006, 08:41

I took this of the mesh plate thats on the front of my tower for the texture comp with the 70-300mm.

http://www.tpfgallery.com/gallery2/d/10743-2/Texture.jpg