Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Sigma Lenses

  1. #1
    Member UA-F9 Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Chicago, IL/Boulder, CO
    Posts
    441

    Default Sigma Lenses

    Ok, i know theres a thread about what lense/camera i should buy already but specifically, does anyone know how Sigma lenses are for a canon digital rebel? I was just wondering because they make a 75-300 just like Canon but its a bit cheaper. So basically, are they any worse than Canon? and if they are, in what ways is the quality less?

  2. #2
    JP Elite Member tomas_cubero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    266

    Default

    Hi,

    Well I am learning about SLR's and lenses right now and I have found out that Sigma are by far more expensive than Canon lenses. I mean, Canon does do some very good lenses, for instance the great 70-200mm L or the 75-300mm IS, the problem with Sigma is that I mean the prices for a decnt lens are just sooo high that they discourage you to buy them. I mean you see the 75-300mm IS by Canon on eBay like for $350-$400 but then you look for similar one but Sigma and the prices doubles to like $800-$900 and man, when you can buy a new 300D on eBay like for $600, to pay $800 for a lens is just like stabbing some one, its just too painful. My friend and Jp.net spotter Jason Nicholls uses a Canon EF 75-300mm F/4-5.6 III USM and he takes some marvelous shots with his 10D. You can check out his photos at http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=435 I am looking forward to buy a Tamron 200-400mm LD F5.6 on eBay for less than $200 and I have heard its a great lens, if it isn't, can someone please help me out! Thanks!

    Best Regards from Costa Rica!,

  3. #3
    Member fallingeese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    920

    Default

    I'm not too sure what you are talking about as Sigma lenses are almost always cheaper than their Canon, or Nikon for that matter counterpart. Sigma does make relatively good lenses, but as with any other camera equiptment, generally you get what you pay for.

  4. #4
    Junior Member Rutger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    44

    Default

    Well ... I use the Sigma 50-500, one of Sigma's top lenses, and I just can't imagine I go spotting without this lens. Great sharpness (even at 500mm full), but try and get a tripod or monopod. It's quite havy, and standing like 10hours with that on your neck, I can tell you, it hurts!

    Sigma does make relatively good lenses, but as with any other camera equiptment, generally you get what you pay for.
    I know there are some people thinking Sigma makes bad lenses, and I can tell, their best lenses (like 50-500, 135-400, ...) are very good, but stay away from their cheap lenses (28-300, 70-300,...)

    Hope this helps a bit

  5. #5
    Administrator seahawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Germany - near DUS
    Posts
    7,837

    Default

    Their 70-300 is not a top nothc lense, but no 70-300 (inc÷uding Canon and Nikon) in that class is a knock-out. If it is just a gap filler until you go to a L lense, then you can save the money for the Canon. Unless you want to sell the 70-300 afterwards, then Sigmas are a nono.

    However Sigma has some very fine lenses.

    I personally do love the HSM 100-300 4.0. An excellent lense. The same can be said about the HSM 120-300 2.8.

    The 50-500 is loved by many, but I┤m not so happy with it, as I think it lacks when forced to use full open.

    The Sigma 135-400 is ok, for its price.

  6. #6
    Aching Member E-Diddy!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    teh GFK
    Posts
    2,258

    Default

    I'd get the 50-500 if only it had an OS, that's my main deciding factor which is why I'll be probably getting the 100-400L IS when I get the cash.



  7. #7
    мать Россия Longreach747's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,860

    Default

    nothing wrong with Sigma, i use the 50-500 and it's sharp as a blade! another good option is the Sigma 70-200 2.8 and that is on a par with the Canon 70-200L. don't know much about the 75-300 Canon but it takes average photos!

    the best thing you can put on your canon outside an L lens is a Sigma.


    next trips
    USA/DXB August.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    L.A.
    Posts
    6,844

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Longreach747
    nothing wrong with Sigma, i use the 50-500 and it's sharp as a blade! another good option is the Sigma 70-200 2.8 and that is on a par with the Canon 70-200L. don't know much about the 75-300 Canon but it takes average photos!

    the best thing you can put on your canon outside an L lens is a Sigma.
    Well pretty much all my shots are with a Canon 75-300 III USM

  9. #9
    Administrator seahawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Germany - near DUS
    Posts
    7,837

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Longreach747
    nothing wrong with Sigma, i use the 50-500 and it's sharp as a blade! another good option is the Sigma 70-200 2.8 and that is on a par with the Canon 70-200L. don't know much about the 75-300 Canon but it takes average photos!

    the best thing you can put on your canon outside an L lens is a Sigma.
    I disagree. If you think the 50-500 is sharp when used full open, then you should rent a Canon 300mm 2.8 prime. That is sharp.

  10. #10
    мать Россия Longreach747's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,860

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seahawk
    I disagree. If you think the 50-500 is sharp when used full open, then you should rent a Canon 300mm 2.8 prime. That is sharp.
    you pay and i'll use it, the 50-500 does the job just as good for me!



    next trips
    USA/DXB August.

  11. #11
    Administrator seahawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Germany - near DUS
    Posts
    7,837

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Longreach747
    you pay and i'll use it, the 50-500 does the job just as good for me!

    Sure it does its job. I think it is also a difference because of our different locations. I guess you have many more sunny days, then I do have here in Germany. So the perfromance when shooting wide open is not that important to you, as it is to me.
    I can only say, that the Nikon AF-S 300 2.8D I have is really far, far ahead to any Sigma (maybe except the 120-300 2. when it comes to sharpness wide-open.
    Btw. did you ever compare the Sigma 80-400 OS to the 50-500 ?

  12. #12
    Junior Member Rutger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    44

    Default

    Btw. did you ever compare the Sigma 80-400 OS to the 50-500 ?
    Fallowing several users who used both, the Sigma 80-400's AF is slow ...

    Sure it does its job. I think it is also a difference because of our different locations. I guess you have many more sunny days, then I do have here in Germany.
    Correct, but it's not impossible to shoot in bad weather :

    http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=430537

    But, OS on the bigma would be great! Nothing to do about it now

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •