Lens Decision

[Fiml]

Looking for a consumer lens in the 70-300 category I have come up with these three:

Sigma APO MACRO SUPER II 70-300mm F4-5.6
Tamron 70-300 LD MACRO 1:2 F4-5.6
Canon 75-300 F/4.5-6 III USM SLR Lens

The lens will be mated to a 300D. Main use of the lens is nature, wildlife. Just trying to get closer to the action without breaking the $250 budget.

Any thoughts or additions to my list?

[mrclark321]

I have a 100-300mm that I am going to list shortly if interested.
A lot better than 75-300mm

Dan

[ron chappel]

The canon 75-300 is a little cheapand nasty .Here is a good thread discussing the potential of that model-
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=66019

The sigma apo macro super II is well liked on this forum.I just bought one myself and must admit i expected better .My example was abit better than the 75-300 at shorter focal lengths but performance dropped alarmingly towards 300mm to be about equal to the 75-300 (in other words pretty lame)
Perhaps mine is a dud?I hope so or all those recommending this lens have some explaining to do;) :lol:
Assuming the average example is better than mine at the long end,it would be a great value lens.It comes with a decent hood & carry bag,has awsome 1:2 macro ability and feels very nice in the hand (for a consumer lens)


The tamron 70-300LD (1:2) i also have right now.It's an excellent lens,no risk.
Wether it would ultimately beat the canon 100-300usm is abit of an unknown...but i can tell you it will be VERY close (i've tested them both against 75-300's but at different times).
This lens comes with a hood ,has excellent 1:2 macro is is above average for sharpness right accross the zoom range.The ONLY drawbacks i can think of are the silly 62mm filter size,focus isn't awsomely fast and it may possibly be not as sharp as the canon 100-300usm

The canon 100-300usm is pretty much top of the range in consumer zooms (on evidence so far....)
It doesn't get as soft towards 300mm like most consumer zooms,has very fast genuine ring type ultrasonic focus and good contrast/colour
on the minus side it misses out on serious macro ability and doesn't include free extras like off brand lenses

Hopefully one day soon i will be able to do a comparison between all the contenders in this zoom class.There's still some organising to do yet-and i have to get more experience with several lenses-some of them i've only ever used one example and so i'm not sure if i got a good or bad one,etc


Incidentally there is one other possible lens you may like.It's the old canon 100-300/5.6L .It has some drawbacks of course like only available secondhand,fixed slow minimum aperture and not very fast focus.But it is EXTREMELY sharp right up to 300mm-a genuine L lens:eek: for sure.It easily beats the other lenses i have!
I think the going price may be more than the others mentioned also.
One to think about though

[Fiml]

Thanks for the reply Ron.

I would like to change my list slightly.

Add the Canon 75-300 f/4.0-5.6 IS USM EF (pn: 2570A003)

I have a line on the Canon for about $325-$350 I realize I am adding about $160 to the price compared to the others but I really like the IS.

Thanks again.

[Keiffer]

Great mini review of the lenses Ron I'm sure alot of people are taking note. I would like to see others with the Sigma chime in an tell of their experiences. I also heard many say the Sigma Apo is a better lense and was quite shocked to hear you disagree. Think you could post some pics comparing the two(Sigma and the Tamron)? If this is the case you just saved me some money because I was leaning towrds the Sigma. Thanks agin for the comparisons.

[MTalley]

I picked up the Tamron yesterday and played around with it last night and today. So far, I'm happy with it. Yes, the focus is a little slow from one extreme to another, but it does OK. A little noisy, perhaps.

So far, I've been pleased with the results. I was out using the macro function a little this morning. Look in the Transportation forum of the photos section for the subject "Porsche Perspectives" or something like that. The first two were shot with the macro. The first is a little soft to me, but I'm not sure exactly where it focused.

Also posted a couple of moon shots from last night in the "Landscapes" forum, with the title "Moon Redux". If you do a 100% zoom, you will see a little purple fringing around the outside of very white areas that merge into dark areas. But, considering that is at full 300mm, it's not bad. Haven't noticed any vignetting yet.

[Fiml]

Sorry guys, it probably isn't a fair of me to add the Canon IS lens to the list given the price point of the Sigma and Tamron lenses.

The question I have to ask myself is the IS worth the $180. I assume the Canon lens on the IS is comprable to the Sigma and Tamron lenses and that the extra cash for the Canon is for the IS.

[ron chappel]

To be honest Keiffer i probably shouldn't post comparison shots from the sigma.
The Tamron easily beats it at 300mm but i'm really not confident that my sigma is an 'average' example and may hurt it's reputation unnessesarily.

If i can try at least one other example of the sigma i'll be on safer ground:)

I really should stress that i really liked everything about the sigma except it's 300mm performance.
I did once ask someone if they could post equal magnification examples from this lens-his results show a very similar result to what i got
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=72418

I'm really hoping other sigma apo owners can give comparisons with their lens,it would be great to get a baseline to see if this model varies by much


Fiml- The 75-300IS is essentially identical to the normal versions in an optical sense with one slight twist.
The IS allows you to use smaller apertures more often which means you are more likely to be using it stopped down abit at the long end.This is something you this lens REALLY needs to be able to get reasonably sharp images at that length.

Other than that,the IS feature is very usefull as i'm sure you've read about.Personally i'll be selling my 75-300IS soon as i don't think the huge premium over the standard model is worth it-just my choice of course,others must decide if it's worth it for their circumstances

[lomond]

I have the 75-300 IS version and I think it a pretty decent lens.
I must admit I upgraded to the 100-400L IS. However that doesn't make the 75-300IS a bad lens.

What I didn't like was the lens creep. It doesn't have the contrast or reach or sharpness of the 100-400, but for the money it's not a bad lens. The IS is useful but if you don't need IS buy the version without it..

[Fiml]

I guess I am spoiled as the 300D is my 1st DSLR and coming from a Canon S1 IS, the IS is one of the features of that camera I much enjoyed.

I tend not to travel with a tripod and the IS was a god send for my shaky hands.

[Keiffer]

Ron so the Tamron is the way to go on this one huh? No prob about not posting pics I understand. I was afraid of the Tamron because I heard something about if you point the lense down that the zoom extends. Is this true?
Hey too bad your not in Sydney my son is going to make a stop off there soon and he's having camera problems ie: Doesn't know how to use it LOL. I just emailed him trying to explain about slow shutter speeds equal blur hand held LOL
Thanks again for your response Ron.

[ron chappel]

My tamron doesn't suffer zoom creep at all.Just to see how good it is i shook it hard while it was pointing down-it sort of moved a little-very good overall i'd say :)

Please note that tamron has several models of about the same focal length selling in different markets PLUS some online sellers still sell older models just to confuse the matter!
The model i'm disscussing here is the current 1:2 macro version with a 62mm filter diameter.
The model number is 572D (or 772D in silver if avail where you are)
Note when they sell them they reverse those numbers making it the 275D (yes it is bizzare)
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&kw=TA703004MCAF&is=REG&Q=&O=productlist&sku=213159

One thing i forgot to mention though- most of these class of telezooms have some purple fringing when used on digital bodies and the tamron is no exception.I just had a quick glance at old images-it does seem to have a little more than the canon 100-300usm,75-300 and sigma apo.
...if this is a concern to you.Personally it rarely worries me on any lens

[Keiffer]

Thanks for all the info Ron, I bookmarked that page and I think this will be my next purchase. I'm also not too concerned to the fringing. Thanks again.

[aggarcia]

I used the Sigma 70-300 APO II to catch road racing for 6 months. It is a great lense for $200. I was even able to shoot a race in a full thunderstorm. The pictures came out a little dark ( 5.6 @ 300 ), but photoshop was able to lighten them up (http://www.garciaalfaracing.com/Sprint_web/index.htm ). My only complaint was for my intended use, it did not focus fast enough. A bought a 70-200 Sigma 2.8, but kept the 70-300 because I can let my wife use it and I know the results we be very good.