Canon vs Sigma lenses

Hi all,
I have a Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 on the way and only went that way because such Canon L lens doesn't exist up to 300. I'm waiting to see what I can get out of it as far as pics. An comments as to how the EX Sigma lenses stack against Canon L glass? I'm thinking the next purchase will be a F2.8 zoom lens that I can get about 28mm out of due to the cropping factor. It is only bad how much some of these lenses cost if you know what I mean. In the meantime, I will see about bridging the gap between the 16-120mm area. I'm looking at Canon L glass for the rest of it. Time to do some research... any suggestions?

Cheers!

First off,. I am very interested to hear your opinion of that 120-300mm f/2.8 EX lens. It is one of Sigma's newest EX lenses,. (the newest is the 80-400 "OS" ) so there are very few reviews of it as of yet. I have been looking at this lens for some time as well.

It is in the same family as the 70-200mm f/2.8 EX which I regard VERY highly, it is one of my best lenses.

The better EX lenses stack up against there "L" counterparts very well IMHO... my rule of thumb is to look at the price difference... if the Canon "L" is about twice the price,. I go for the Sigma,. if the Canon "L" is only a few hundred more,.. I may spring for the "L".

At the Wide end,. Sigma has the 15-30mm EX and the 17-35mm. Both of these lenses get more mixed reviews than say the 120-300mm f/2.8 or 70-200mm f/2.8 in the EX line,. and the 15-30mm is clearly regarded to be the better choice of the two. But at $550.00,. it is not a lot cheaper than the Canon 17-40mm f/4 which is only a few hundred more,. so that's the one I got.

The reviews on that lens are hardly "mixed",. most everyone really likes the 17-40mm f/4.

It looks like you have clearly bought Sigma the "right way",... not only did you get an EX,. but you got one of the very good "EX" lenses.

In the wide to mid range,. peoples opinions of the 20-40mm, 24-70mm, and 28-70mm Sigma's do not seem to be "stellar"

Many like them,. others have said they are not very good at all. I myself am a little shy of them for this reason.
My suggestion would be the Canon 28-135mm IS for this zoom range.

On the other hand,. I have heard very good things about the much less expensive Tokina 28-70mm f/2.8??

Go figure?

CyberDyneSystems wrote:
First off,. I am very interested to hear your opinion of that 120-300mm f/2.8 EX lens. It is one of Sigma's newest EX lenses,. (the newest is the 80-400 "OS" ) so there are very few reviews of it as of yet. I have been looking at this lens for some time as well.

* I will gladly share my input as soon as I shoot a few hundred pics w/ it to get a fair idea how it performs. It should be here Friday at the latest I'm guessing. I will gladly share first impressions in the meantime!

It is in the same family as the 70-200mm f/2.8 EX which I regard VERY highly, it is one of my best lenses.

* Heck, if Sigma can outdo Canon I'm all for it. That's why I went for this one. I'm also curouis on your take on the Sigma 50-500 lens. I was considering that one for the "dialling long distance" factor as the 500 is an 800 effective lens on the 10D.

The better EX lenses stack up against there "L" counterparts very well IMHO... my rule of thumb is to look at the price difference... if the Canon "L" is about twice the price,. I go for the Sigma,. if the Canon "L" is only a few hundred more,.. I may spring for the "L".

* Time will tell on this one! I'm hoping it does and it had better for like $1900 plus the filters. I am waiting to see this one.

At the Wide end,. Sigma has the 15-30mm EX and the 17-35mm. Both of these lenses get more mixed reviews than say the 120-300mm f/2.8 or 70-200mm f/2.8 in the EX line,. and the 15-30mm is clearly regarded to be the better choice of the two. But at $550.00,. it is not a lot cheaper than the Canon 17-40mm f/4 which is only a few hundred more,. so that's the one I got.

* I have to wonder about the distortion as you go that low to like 15 mm. I was hoping to stay at F.28 for all the lenses I have. I might got fo the Canon L glass on this one and the one to get me to about 120 mm.

The reviews on that lens are hardly "mixed",. most everyone really likes the 17-40mm f/4.

* Where can I find said reviews on lenses? I know you can find all kinds of reviews on digital cameras in many locations.

It looks like you have clearly bought Sigma the "right way",... not only did you get an EX,. but you got one of the very good "EX" lenses.

* I should hope it is for this cost, $1900. I'm wondering about the 80-400 lens as well!

In the wide to mid range,. peoples opinions of the 20-40mm, 24-70mm, and 28-70mm Sigma's do not seem to be "stellar"

Many like them,. others have said they are not very good at all. I myself am a little shy of them for this reason.
My suggestion would be the Canon 28-135mm IS for this zoom range.

*the reason I asked about the 16mm area is to get around 28mm like I did w/ the EOS 50E. I have found that a 28-80 lens just doesn't hack it all the time, considering it is more like 45mm. I have missed a few great shots, including one of a Saxon Church in England going back to 680 AD. Kinda need that wide angle back!

On the other hand,. I have heard very good things about the much less expensive Tokina 28-70mm f/2.8??

Go figure?

* You're not the only one! Again thanks for the info!
Cheers!

Regarding the Sigma 50-500mm

This lens is one of the best deals out there. Period.

It is my most used lens,.. partly because I am an avid wildlife enthusiast,. so the long range is where I do most of my shooting,.. but it is clearly an excellent lens in it's own right and very flexible with it's huge zoom range.

I recomend this one over the 170-500mm as the 50-500mm is in the "EX" falmily,. is a newer improved desighn and it incoporates the "HSM" motor that gives it it's smooth fast and quiet focusing.

I use the Sigma EX 15-30 lens and i´m happy with it, produces great pictures look in the link on my profile. I have the EF 50/1,8 II lens that i mostly have close-up lenses mounted, and the great L-glass 80-200 that take the upper zone. What i miss is a better quality zoom for the band 24-70, trying to find a used 24-70 or 28-70 L zoom. But look at the Sigma 15-30 it´s a great piece of glass.

Cheers
Jerker

Just wanted to jump on the Sigma 50-500mm bandwagon. Truly superb lens that I've even successfully hand held with a 1D to shoot fast moving sport at 500mm, with prime lens quality results !

Paul
http://www.1dforum.co.​uk

i love my 50-500 too.

Just to get in on the action with the 50-500 sigma lens... Am I the only one with the problem that it does not seem to focus pin sharp at the 50 mm end? It seems to work best at the 200-500 end and yes, I do love this lens. I have only owned one for about a month now and it seems to have replaced all but my 105 sigma macro lens ( Canon IS 28-135 and Canon IS 75-300 have not been used since I put the 50-500 on my D60)

Kees

No,.. you are not the only one. I agree that the lens is in reality a 120-500mm for sharp pics,. but better to be murky at the 50mm end than the 500mm end! It is not uncommon for a zoom to have better image qualty at specific areas of its range,.. with a zoom of such huge (10X) proportions,. I am not surprised that some area must suffer.

I have a few rare 50mm shots that don't seem "fuzzy" but I can not account for why?

However, we bought this lens for the long end. For 50mm we have our trusty 50mm f/1.8s etc. or in your case the 28-135mm IS

The wide 50mm I rarely use on this lens and I consider it "icing".

Just a quick Q about the 50-500 Sigma lens. Is it normal that the end which you stick in the camera feels loose? The lens takes perfect pictures but I feel a bit uncomfortable with fact that it feels like there are a few screws loose within the lens. It is still under guarantee and I could just return it. The problem is that I live on Jersey where shop assitance is pretty limited and there are not many places where you can look for other shops to find the same items. If I return it, I will probably have to wait about half a year for a replacememt and as I seem to use the lens 90% of the time, I would seriously miss it. Perhaps this also explains why it has trouble focussing every now and again.

Dear CDS,

You would be amazed about how often I tend to use the low end of the zoom as well. I purchased the lens for its 500 mm end but tend tu use it very often at the 50 mm end as well to get the bigger landscape in the frame...

Icing? I like that term. That is probably what is happening to my 35mm cameras right now

Kees

Kees,

Clarify for me what you mean by loose?

I ask because at first when I read it sounded like the fit from lens to camera is loose,. and yes I think this is somehwat normal,.. all my lenses have a certain amount of "slop" in the fit to camera,... and it seems more noticable with the 50-500 I think because the lens out weighs the camera by so much.

But,. the second time I read it I also saw that your problem couyld be interpreted as the back of (or mount) the lens itself is loose?

If the lens mount on the lens itself is loose,. then that is a problem for sure.

I hope this helps.

P.S.,.. Sigma USA is in Long Island,... there is no reason at all that any repair to your lens (if needed) should take mor than two weeks or so.

Hi all,
Just an update on the 120-300mm F2.8 EX APO HSM IF lens I ordered like 10 days ago...it has still yet to come in. Let's hear it for the US Mail service and the back out and sending overseas! LOL! It might be awhile.
Have patience I keep telling myself and I can't wait to see this awesome lens which, like I said before, I will do my first impressions and then later the actual pics, some of which I will have to post, eventually. This is the downfall of being Armed Forces Europe, it can take a while to get here. Although, most of the time stuff gets here really quick, like 3-5 days. Idunno. I'm curious to see how it works. I have a few standard pics I can take of when it comes in. One is a cathedral about 35 min from here and the other can be somewhere in the semi-local area. I'm curious to see how it stacks against the pic I took on 35mm film Dec, 2002. Time will tell!
Stay tuned...
Mike

This is not about Sigma, but I bought a19-35mm Tameron, and I took with me to my trip to Toronto. I took pictures of loacal sites and my grand children in these sites and I liked what I saw.
Soon I droped taking my Canon 24-135 USM IS and Canon 75-300 mm and found Tameron more light and versatile. Wish Tameron had more metal and less plastic on the lens though.

[QUOTE]CyberDyneSystems wrote:
,.. all my lenses have a certain amount of "slop" in the fit to camera,... and it seems more noticable with the 50-500 I think because the lens out weighs the camera by so much.


I am actually writing from Jersey Channel Islands (off the coast off France... Long Island would be a bit out of my way...

The slop is actually between the part that goes into the camera (which is pretty firm and stable) and the actual lens itself. The lens has about a 8 cm fitting (foreard) and then the thicker part with the lenses in it. The slop is between the large part of the lens and the fitting (not actually the fitting to the camera). If I hold the lens by the tripod foot- there is about 1/2 cm slop if I move it up, down and sideways. There is no interfearance with the image quality though but non of my other lenses, Canon nor Sigma have this amount of slop. Perhaps I will return it to the shop before the guarantee runs out. I just thought it would be worth checking with you guys as you seem to know a whole lot more about this than our rather uneducated shop assistants here on the rock.

Cheers

Kees