Sigma 70-300 APO DG + 28-300mm

Glen · 16-02-2006, 22:27

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.

CT · 16-02-2006, 23:18

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.

CT · 16-02-2006, 23:23

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

SammyC · 17-02-2006, 08:49

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, 08:58

Well I had a look here 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, 09:16

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, 09:16

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!)

SammyC · 17-02-2006, 09:17

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, 09:30

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!

Steep · 17-02-2006, 10:58

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

Matty · 17-02-2006, 12:12

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, 12:30

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, 12:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glen

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, 12:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe T

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, 13:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glen

Yes, would this be a mistake to replace 55-200mm?

It would replace the 55-200 just right.

SammyC · 18-02-2006, 13:56

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, 17:59

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, 22:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glen

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?

16-02-2006, 22:27	#1 (permalink)
Glen Been here a while Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 333	Sigma 70-300 APO DG + 28-300mm 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. Last edited by Glen : 16-02-2006 at 23:11.

17-02-2006, 08:49	#4 (permalink)
SammyC Forum Regular Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Bristol Posts: 1,466	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. __________________ Canon 350D Canon 18-55 kit lens Canon 28-105 f3.5-4.5 USM Canon 50 1.8 Mk 1 Sigma 70-300 APO Macro DG Kenko extension tubes My photographs

16-02-2006, 23:18	#2 (permalink)
CT Feet under the table Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: West Mids UK Posts: 3,500	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.

16-02-2006, 23:23	#3 (permalink)
CT Feet under the table Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: West Mids UK Posts: 3,500	How much are you looking to spend Glen? It gives people a better idea what to suggest.

17-02-2006, 08:58	#5 (permalink)
SammyC Forum Regular Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Bristol Posts: 1,466	Well I had a look here 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.

17-02-2006, 09:16	#6 (permalink)
Glen Been here a while Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 333	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.

17-02-2006, 09:16	#7 (permalink)
SammyC Forum Regular Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Bristol Posts: 1,466	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!)

17-02-2006, 09:17	#8 (permalink)
SammyC Forum Regular Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Bristol Posts: 1,466	BTW, I think the Sigma 10-20mm EX HSM is an excellent lens (the EX tag means quality in Sigma speak).

17-02-2006, 09:30	#9 (permalink)
Glen Been here a while Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 333	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!

17-02-2006, 10:58	#10 (permalink)
Steep Forum Regular Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inverness Posts: 964	As long as it's the APO version you go for you won't be disappointed Glen.

17-02-2006, 12:12	#11 (permalink)
Matty Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: kings hill Posts: 5,269	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...

17-02-2006, 12:30	#12 (permalink)
noah Been here a while Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: cardiff and bristol Posts: 414	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.

18-02-2006, 13:56	#16 (permalink)
SammyC Forum Regular Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Bristol Posts: 1,466	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.

18-02-2006, 17:59	#17 (permalink)
Glen Been here a while Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 333	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.