Canon 55-250 or Sigma 70-300 APO

[tab]

For xmas I will be getting a 450d with kit lens but I am also thinking of buying the 450d as a twin lens bundle.
I could get the 450d/kit lens with either a Canon 55-250 from Warehouse Express or with a Sigma 70-300 APO from Jessops.(also comes with 4GB SD card). prices for both bundles are very similar.
Some advice on which one to go for would be a huge help.
I like taking pictures of birds and other wildlife.
Do I go for the Canon which has IS or for the Sigma which has slightly longer focal length.
I currently use a Kodak Z812 which has IS which helps as anything above 200 ISO starts to show some noise.
I think that I should be able to get away with using 800 ISO at times with the 450d which will enable a faster shutter speed to be used so will I really need the IS.
Any advice will be welcome.

Cheers

Tab

[PhatheadWRX]

I have the Sigma and it produces some great images from 70-200, but it does get softer closer to 300mm. I really wish it had IS though.

From what I have seen here the 55-250 produces a very good image too.
There are a number of threads here comparing these two lenses

[KarlosDaJackal]

For birds its easily the Sigma.

Why? Well for birds you want all the FL you can get, and even though another 50mm is not much its better to have it then to not have it. IS is great indoors in low light with still objects. Birds are not still objects so IS is no good to you, at 250mm to 300mm you will want a shutter speed of 1/320 to defeat camera shake, but you probably need 1/400 to get a sharp image of a small bird as those guys move pretty fast. So if your subject demands a shutter of 1/400 IS will do nothing beneficial but force you to wait a second while it spins up between shots.

More light more shutter is what you need, so start at ISO1600 and work backwards from there. A sharp noisy shot is better than a blurry noise free shot.

The sigma has a rep for being bad at 300mm but I think its pretty decent there

ISO1600 - 300mm - f/8 - 1/2500


forgot to mention that shot is not sharpened, so its a bit soft due to the cameras AA filter

[jwcdds]

I can't comment on the Sig70-300. The IS on the 55-250 is pretty darn impressive. For the price, the 55-250 can't be beat. But along with it, be prepared for the plastic construction. The front element rotates during focusing but I doubt you'll be using CPL's while birding.

[lonelyjew]

I have the 55-250 and, though I haven't used the Sigma I'd say get the Canon. The Sigma is supposed to be very good for the price but the Canon is an outstanding lens for it's relatively small cost. The IS unit is amazing, my first night with it I made a shot in my dimly lit house at 1/10s and 250mm and it came out!

[benee]

Originally Posted by jwcdds

I can't comment on the Sig70-300. The IS on the 55-250 is pretty darn impressive. For the price, the 55-250 can't be beat. But along with it, be prepared for the plastic construction. The front element rotates during focusing but I doubt you'll be using CPL's while birding.

I had the Sigma, and it was a pretty good lens. It was virtually unusable above 280mm, though. If you stopped it down to F11 or so at 300mm, it was almost acceptable, but stopping down that much at 300mm it was hard to get a reasonable shutter speed!

I would definitely go for the 55-250. The IS in this range will probably make a big difference, since the Sigma isn't that good above 280, you're really not losing much range at all.

[KarlosDaJackal]

Originally Posted by benee

I had the Sigma, and it was a pretty good lens. It was virtually unusable above 280mm, though. If you stopped it down to F11 or so at 300mm, it was almost acceptable, but stopping down that much at 300mm it was hard to get a reasonable shutter speed!

I would definitely go for the 55-250. The IS in this range will probably make a big difference, since the Sigma isn't that good above 280, you're really not losing much range at all.

What is it with people and the sigma at 300mm?

300mm - f/6.3 - 1/250 (handheld)


300mm - f/6.3 - 1/250 (handheld)






.
.
.
My last word on this topic, this bird shot of a couple of starlings was at 1/400 which clearly was not fast enough, so although everyone is talking about birds, IS won't help at all. All IS does is allow you to use a slower shutter speed.

[number six]

My Sigma 70-300 APO is just as sharp at 300 as at 200.

-js

[jwcdds]

Originally Posted by KarlosDaJackal

My last word on this topic, this bird shot of a couple of starlings was at 1/400 which clearly was not fast enough, so although everyone is talking about birds, IS won't help at all. All IS does is allow you to use a slower shutter speed.

I don't see a problem here. Sure, IS doesn't prevent motion blur from the subject, but sometimes... a bird can just sit idly on a branch, or perched somewhere calmly and IS can help. You seem to imply IS is completely worthless (regardless of the situation). Certain IS can help with in flight panning as well, so IMO, IS is better to have than not have. Whether the situation calls for its usage, that's to be determined.

[KarlosDaJackal]

Originally Posted by jwcdds

I don't see a problem here. Sure, IS doesn't prevent motion blur from the subject, but sometimes... a bird can just sit idly on a branch, or perched somewhere calmly and IS can help. You seem to imply IS is completely worthless (regardless of the situation). Certain IS can help with in flight panning as well, so IMO, IS is better to have than not have. Whether the situation calls for its usage, that's to be determined.

Can you not read? My statements about IS so far are
1. Birds are not still objects so IS is no good to you
2. this bird shot of a couple of starlings was at 1/400 which clearly was not fast enough, so although everyone is talking about birds, IS won't help

So I'm talking about the specifics of what the OP wants to use the lens for and how IS is not a help in that situation. Get on the case of people who are saying its great you can take a 250mm shot at 1/10, sure that's great but the OP is after birds/wildlife, so yes on the days when its really dark, there is no breeze and all the birds/wildlife stand still for the whole second it takes for the IS unit to spin up it might help

Birds when perched and small animals tend to move their eyes and faces around very fast and almost all the time without rest and you will need 1/400 and faster to capture them blur free. That 1/400 covers camera shake so in this situation IS does not help.

Now if the OP wanted to shoot inanimate objects indoors with no flash the canon would clearly win thanks to the IS. But if you add a flash its back to level pegging. I also use a film body so the EF-s lens is no good for that so it looses out to the 70-300+flash in that situation also. Also while speaking of shooting inanimate objects indoors, the Sigma 70-300 can do 1:2 macro, so with a flash its actually clearly ahead in that area also.

Both lenses are really good, and i'm sure that whichever gets picked will do really well, so yea IS can help in certain situations but not all the time. So if we are going to talk in general about the lenses rather than focus on what the OP is going to use it for then..... A hood is useful most of the time and comes with the sigma, but you have to buy separately with the canon. Macro can be fun when your stuck indoors with you telephoto, the sigma does 1:2 macro the canon would need someone to buy some extension tubes to do that. When your not using your telephoto its handy to put it in a lens case to protect it and keep it clean, you get one with the sigma, the canon would need someone to buy it one. The sigma has distance and magnification markings on the barrel, the canon does not.

So the way I see it the Sigma does the job he wants and is a complete package. The canon throws out everything but the kitchen sink to include IS which has the same benefits/limitations of a €20 monopod or a €30 portable tripod.

[jrscls]

I have used both and would definitely go with the 55-250 IS.

[jwcdds]

Originally Posted by KarlosDaJackal

Can you not read?

IMO, you seem a bit too hostile/aggressive. You're seemingly on the defensive when no one is picking a fight with you. OP asks about 2 lenses. You have your view about the Sig 70-300. Others (including myself) have their views about the 55-250is, believing that the is can come in handy under certain situations. And you come back swinging. What's going on? What's your beef against the 55-250is? Have you used it personally before? Did the is fail you?

I think if you've tried the 55-250is and found the lens lacking, then it'd be better for all of us that you share this experience so we'd understand why the 70-300 would be superior.

In support of Jackal, the faster your shutter speed, the better off you'll be. If you can nail the shots at 1/500s consistently, under decent/optimal lighting, then surely the sigma will give you 45mm more reach.

[wimg]

Originally Posted by jwcdds

IMO, you seem a bit too hostile/aggressive. You're seemingly on the defensive when no one is picking a fight with you. OP asks about 2 lenses. You have your view about the Sig 70-300. Others (including myself) have their views about the 55-250is, believing that the is can come in handy under certain situations. And you come back swinging. What's going on? What's your beef against the 55-250is? Have you used it personally before? Did the is fail you?

I think if you've tried the 55-250is and found the lens lacking, then it'd be better for all of us that you share this experience so we'd understand why the 70-300 would be superior.

In support of Jackal, the faster your shutter speed, the better off you'll be. If you can nail the shots at 1/500s consistently, under decent/optimal lighting, then surely the sigma will give you 45mm more reach.

Actually, 50 mm . But even that is only 20% more (than 250, of 250), and IMO neither here nor there .

Kind regards, Wim

[luigis]

I found the optical quality of the 55-250 superior to the Siggy 70-300. This includes birding, moon shots, people, flying ducks, static ducks, stabilized ducks and other objects.

Luigi

[wimg]

Hi Luigi,

Originally Posted by luigis

I found the optical quality of the 55-250 superior to the Siggy 70-300. This includes birding, moon shots, people, flying ducks, static ducks, stabilized ducks and other objects.

Luigi

Any specific techniques, and if so, which ones?

Kind regards, Wim

P.S.: What about quacking ducks?