Canon 55-250 IS or Sigma 70-300 APO Macro?

H

haze20

Suspended / Banned
Messages
138
Edit My Images
Yes
Can't see that these to have been compared before (vs anyway)

Will be used for wildlife, flower macro etc..

Canon IS sounds good and extra lenth is tempting on Sigma.

Please advise which lens is the best quality, and is IS really worth it ?

Thanks
James
 
Not sure about the Canon, but my experience with the Sigma, was that it was great as a first lens of that focal length, but I found that my copy was a bit soft. I found that the best results were achieved at about f/8 at 200mm. Beyond then it does get notably softer. I then used the Nikon 70-300mm VR, and I noticed the lens being a lot sharper, how much of this was down to the VR im not too sure, but I did do quite a lot of work with the lens handheld.

Hopefully somebody would be able to shed some light on the Canon lens. I would reccomend the Sigma, as it is a good lens for a great price, but dont expect miracle results. :D
 
If the Sigma is going to be soft after 200mm then I'm sure I won't be that happy with it considering there should still be another 100mm available.

Any more advice greatfully received.
 
haze20 said:
If the Sigma is going to be soft after 200mm then I'm sure I won't be that happy with it considering there should still be another 100mm available.

Any more advice greatfully received.
Click to expand...


Go to Jessops, ask to try both out. Then say you want to think about it. Once you have decided, go on camerapricebuster and buy it from the cheapest place on there. :D
 
alex_m90 said:
Go to Jessops, ask to try both out. Then say you want to think about it. Once you have decided, go on camerapricebuster and buy it from the cheapest place on there. :D
Click to expand...

Will do.

However is the IS worth the extra when also losing 50mm ?
 
haze20 said:
Will do.

However is the IS worth the extra when also losing 50mm ?
Click to expand...

I guess that depends on what you use it for - it should give you 2 to 3 stops advantage over the Sigma.
I'm about to get the 55-250 IS myself. I was going to buy the Sigma, but the Canon got such a good review, I decided to go with that.
have a look for yourself www.photozone.de
 
bazzer said:
I guess that depends on what you use it for - it should give you 2 to 3 stops advantage over the Sigma.
I'm about to get the 55-250 IS myself. I was going to buy the Sigma, but the Canon got such a good review, I decided to go with that.
have a look for yourself www.photozone.de
Click to expand...

Seems like a very good review, maybe I should look at spending the extra £50+ to go for the sigma.
 
if you are interested i've got a sigma 70-300apo lens ,bought new about 2mths ago and have only used it once, pm me if you are interested :)
 
I had the non-APO 70-300mm and recently bought a 55-250mm IS, the IS has far better IQ than the Sigma above 200mm.

I did some comparison pics, I'll post them up when I get a mo.
 
I've only used the Canon, but would thoroughly recommend it - the IS is especially useful if you do any degree of hand held shooting.

There are several threads around with shots from the 55-250 if you do a search - all of my shots (in those threads) are at 250mm and lack for very little. I've only ever applied minimal PP before posting (in DPP).

2466626015_4eef3502a9.jpg


2402309559_6dc77060ff.jpg


EDIT : See also http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=62010
 
talisker said:
if you are interested i've got a sigma 70-300apo lens ,bought new about 2mths ago and have only used it once, pm me if you are interested :)
Click to expand...

PM'd

Hallsy said:
I had the non-APO 70-300mm and recently bought a 55-250mm IS, the IS has far better IQ than the Sigma above 200mm.

I did some comparison pics, I'll post them up when I get a mo.
Click to expand...

Please do, would love to see them.

Kdot said:
I've only used the Canon, but would thoroughly recommend it - the IS is especially useful if you do any degree of hand held shooting.

There are several threads around with shots from the 55-250 if you do a search - all of my shots (in those threads) are at 250mm and lack for very little. I've only ever applied minimal PP before posting (in DPP).

EDIT : See also http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=62010
Click to expand...

I have read all the possible threads but none comparing the two.

Bikemansteve said:
I got that Sigma lens last week - the 3 comparison pics I took were at 135mm/ 214mm + 300mm - click the link:

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=63694


Won't have chance to use it again until next Wednedsay on my day off - more pics to follow..........
Click to expand...


Seen these photo's also.

Cheers to every one who has replied, still can't make my mind up !
 
Part of it may come down to whether you want IS or not as well.

Since having IS I have found it a great bonus, whether my hands are particuarly shaky or not I don't know, but it allows me to shoot better pics in low light conditions - which I enjoy doing.

I will get a thread up later of my findings between the non-APO Sigma and the Canon, I didn't take pictures of anything particuarly special, but they should show a difference.

Bear in mind though that the APO Sigma would be an improvement on the Sigma I had.
 
Hallsy said:
Part of it may come down to whether you want IS or not as well.

Since having IS I have found it a great bonus, whether my hands are particuarly shaky or not I don't know, but it allows me to shoot better pics in low light conditions - which I enjoy doing.

I will get a thread up later of my findings between the non-APO Sigma and the Canon, I didn't take pictures of anything particuarly special, but they should show a difference.

Bear in mind though that the APO Sigma would be an improvement on the Sigma I had.
Click to expand...

Will look forward to the thread, thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top