Sigma 28-300mm

So I was looking at the Sigma 28-300mm...I havn't seen anything about it on here, so idk if its a new lens or what. You can find the link to it here: http://www.sigmaphoto.​com …s.asp?id=3305&n​avigator=2 I've heard that Sigma is the best brand to have if you don't get Canon for your Canon DSLR. So this is suposed to work for Wide Angle, Macro, Zoom and Telephoto. All the combos you could ask for in one lens.
Here is one I found on ebay that I like the looks of the seller and stuff. http://cgi.ebay.com …ame=STRK%3AMEWA​%3AIT&rd=1
Any suguestions/comments. Please let me know. I just want to make sure this would be the right lens to get.

Types of Photography--(Landscape, Macro, & lots of Horse events where a long distance is required.)--

I've used several slightly older brands and models of the 28-300 lenses.This newer version will be allmost identical in performance
I found the sigma to be surprisingly good -perhaps even a touch better than the Tamron XR.
The image quality they give is slightly below that of the cheap kit lenses.I've heard others say they thought them to be slightly better than the kit lenses.In any case this will give you a good idea what to expect.
Bascially you can get the same image quality for less money with a pair of kit zooms- at the cost of convenience naturally
Overall i must say that i just wouldn't be happy with a 28-300 lens-they simply aren't QUITE sharp enough to ever be content with ,but that's just me

Other things i noticed :
Both the sigma and tamron models had amazing build quality -allmost no free play in the zoom barrels ! That's amazing for a double extension barrel on a cheap lens
These lenses definitely don't really go to 300mm.They are more like 270-280mm zooms.
Note that all zooms are abit optomistic ,it's just that the hyperzooms exadurate more than others
Focus is reasonably quick

Have you had much experience with SLR's and their lenses? Perhaps we can compare this to something you allready know?

Unfortunitely no. I don't have a whole lot of experience with SLRs and lenses. I am getting the XTi (After much fighting with the parents over why the 20D is better, but decided to give in to the smaller price) next week. I don't have alot of money to spend on a lens (which is why I'm not getting one Canon), but I want what I get to be good quality. I also don't want to have to change lenses out all the time or carry a bunch around. I travel alot and would be taking the camera with me everywhere...So any ideas with all this in mind of what to get...?

Do yourself a favour and buy a "nifty 50" 50mm 1.8 prime (non zoom) I got one for 100 australian dollars brand new. Thats about 60 bucks for you (assuming you're american).

And then, buy a sigma or tamron (both good inexpensive brands) wither wider or longer, or both. You'll probably end up only a few hundred more than the 28-300, but I promise it will be worth it.

My 350d I had before my 30d came with a sigma 28-300, and I found it HORRIBLE. It actually put me off using the camera. Just recently it broke, doesn't a/f, after almost no use. Peice of crap.

I do have a sigma 10-20 though and its a fantastic lens

I would opt for a Tamron 28-75mm and maybe later in the future a canon 70-200mm f/4 if you really need a telephoto.

The Tamron 28-75m has IQ comparable to the canon 24-70L and only costs a fraction of the price. I reckon you should go for the 350D and spend the difference in money on the tamron. IF you really need the long end, consider getting the 70-200mm in the near future.

I have a Sigma 28-300mm for my 30D. It's a good inexpensive lens provided you don't use it as your only lens for every situation. Where I use mine is exclusively outdoors on sunny days. I shoot places like outdoor festivals and races, places where a lens swap is not a good idea but you only have one body and need that wide of a focal range. I'll probably get flamed by the L crowd but I've used the canon 28-300L and found that image quality was close enough for 11x17 prints and smaller, where the canon lens beats the sigma is that it was more forgiving under bad light. Which brings me to the worst thing about the Sigma lens AF under anything but clear sunny skies is horrible, it's slow and hunts forever.