Photo newbi

If you are looking for a good general photography lens, the ef-s 55-250 does make sense, and is a good lens, And the thread size is 58mm also. So you can use the same cpl.

Well going to a store near my house that has all the lenses and ill ask for a small trial to see, thanks for all guys

Hello to all, so i already went to the dealer close to me and he had both lenses and i took some photos with both lenses and to be honest the one from Sigma was the best, i didn't notice any focus problems and since i have a very steady hand the IS system isn't really needed, i took pictures from the 70 range till the 300 and i loved the macro function that the lens has, now my question is is there any other lens with the price range of the Sigma 70-300 MM F4-5,6 DG APO MACRO as good as this one?

At the longer ranges or the zoom the IS does help allot. I can take shots down at 1/16 of a sec with a short lens, but I can not hold a long zoom when the light drops and I can not get the shutter speed up past 1/150 at 300mm. But the sig is okay, the canon is sharper. But the sigma has better macro ability.

Rule of thumb when shooting non is lens. 1/the focal length is what you need to avoid camera shake in general, some can do it a bit better then others. So if you are shooting at 300mm. You may need to get the shutter speed to 1/200 if you have a stead hand.

Juho wrote in post #11631366
Thanks for all the answer so far.

@realmike15: the 18-55 doesn't have enough reach for me the image quality i cant complain tho i still need to buy a uv and polarized filter :P anyway the focus issues that you are referring are they that bad? Because the review i saw from the lens they seem very good, anyway what other lens can you recomend with a macro function? (yes i know its not a pure macro lens but its good to have something :P)

@jase1125 & hieu1004: any other recomendations?

amfoto1 wrote in post #11635011
A circular polarizer filter can be handy for certain types of shooting. It helps cut reflections for one thing. It will also deepen the blue of skies and help clouds stand out. It can be useful making foliage look richer and greener. And can be handy if photographing someone who has shiny/oily skin and/or wears eyeglasses. It's probably the most useful of filters. It's also relatively expensive, to get a good one.
<snip>
I think both the 18-55 and 55-250 both use 52mm filters. That's a fairly small size, so might not be too expensive. Shop around.

The circular polarizer on the 18-55 and 55-250 might be awkward to use since the front element rotates while focusing. (Not speaking from experience but that's my general understanding)

Cokeman wrote in post #11649009
The circular polarizer on the 18-55 and 55-250 might be awkward to use since the front element rotates while focusing. (Not speaking from experience but that's my general understanding)

There are no problems with the filters/ front element movement.

You just focus first then turn the clp. Just a different workflow. Not a big problem really.