Sigma 17-70 or Canon 18-55 IS (kit lens)

F

fox in the box

Suspended / Banned
Messages
265
Name
Stuart
Edit My Images
Yes
Good morning all.

I bought myself a Canon 450d and 18-55 IS kit lens. I'm more than happy with the results that I have been achieving and can't actullay put the camra down!! However, I was after some guidance/general opinions with regards to upgrading the lens.

Long before I bought the camera I decided I'd probably buy a Sigma 17-70 but I'm now wondering if this is worth the upgrade. This lens is currently £185 on jessops.com (with discount voucher) which appears to be a bargain.

I am, at some stage, also looking to get a Sigma 70-300 APO for wildlife photography etc. For about £130 from Jessops I feel this would also be a good choice.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Stuart
 
Hi Stuart.

I went a little while talking with people that would put down Sigma lenses. I'm not gonna do that. I own multiple L series canon lenses but if you are looking for affordabale glass with good results Sigma (imho) deliver.

You can never have too much glass. EVER!
But as you've got the 18-55 I'd just straight to the 70-300 APO Sigma. It's a good lens and served me well when I had the same.

Just my two pence worth... :D
 
With reviews of the Canon 18-55 IS and Sigma 17-70 i dont think you'll notice any gain in image quality, the sigma build is better thats about it apart fom the obvious focal lengths. Forget the f2.8 at 17mm on the sigma

I'd hold out and buy the longer lens at the moment, then at a later date test (at shop) and print between the 2 lenses

Dave
 
I don't think the sigma is the massive step up over the kit lens it used to be before canon updated the lens so provided you can live without the extra reach then i'd give it a miss. I also think things have moved on in the budget zoom sector and that for me means that the canon 55-250 IS is probably the sweet spot now it's very sharp and the excellent latest generation IS means you'll get alot more keepers.
 
I agree with a1ex2001s' comment about the Canon 55-250 IS, we had the Sigma 70-300 APO and then got the Canon, and it is a step up in quality -image wise, for both sharpness and colour- I don't think you'd notice the missing 50mm off the long end either.
 
I have just got the Sigma 17-70 lens to replace my 18 - 55 kit lens and it is a definate step up but my kit lens was the more basic one without the IS. It came with an EOS300 a few years ago. I think the one you have is better quality.
 
chilliz said:
I have just got the Sigma 17-70 lens to replace my 18 - 55 kit lens and it is a definate step up but my kit lens was the more basic one without the IS. It came with an EOS300 a few years ago. I think the one you have is better quality.
Click to expand...

The Sigma 17-70 was made to smash the old canon 18-55 kit lens and it succeded for the money and range it is an outstanding lens but canons upgraded 18-55 IS kit lens brings the two much closer together and makes me wonder if the outlay would be worth while.

I'm really hoping Sigma will refresh some of there lenses to include there excellent OS system it would be really handy on the long end of the 17-70 occasionally and if they put if on the 70-200 and keep the price as far below the canon equivalent as it is now I'll be first in line.
 
Thanks for all the help. I think I'll stick with the 18-55 as I have been happy with the results.

I had considered the 55-250 but decided I'd like the extra reach. However, after reading the views on here I'll have to re-think as I'm being swayed to this lens again.
 
fox in the box said:
Thanks for all the help. I think I'll stick with the 18-55 as I have been happy with the results.

I had considered the 55-250 but decided I'd like the extra reach. However, after reading the views on here I'll have to re-think as I'm being swayed to this lens again.
Click to expand...

I was in a similar situation last summer and was origionally dead set on the sigma but after investigating it a bit further decided that the 55-250 IS would probably produce better results fo me. It has Canons latest IS system which is very good and I would expect it to up your keeper ratio. The extra 50mm would obviously be nice but with the high resolution on your 450D you should be able to crop a bit to make up for it. I really do thing that the 55-250 IS is the new king of the budget telephotos (for canon users at least)

Personally I landed up with an old Canon 70-210 F4 but I was feeling poor at the time!
 
a1ex2001 said:
I was in a similar situation last summer and was origionally dead set on the sigma but after investigating it a bit further decided that the 55-250 IS would probably produce better results fo me. It has Canons latest IS system which is very good and I would expect it to up your keeper ratio. The extra 50mm would obviously be nice but with the high resolution on your 450D you should be able to crop a bit to make up for it. I really do thing that the 55-250 IS is the new king of the budget telephotos (for canon users at least)

Personally I landed up with an old Canon 70-210 F4 but I was feeling poor at the time!
Click to expand...


Thanks for the guidance on this one. I took the plunge and bought a 55-250 IS last night - £175 from Jacobs was a very good deal. I haven't had a proper chance to test it out yet but from the few shots I have taken I am really pleased.

I looked at the 70-300 Sigma in-store too - personally it didn't feel right.

On another note, anyone thinking of buying some equipment £150+ sign up to Jacobs webiste and you get a £15 voucher.
 
You won't be disappointed with the 55-250mm, it's a great lens for the cash. IS works very well also. I had a non APO Sigma 70-300 before this and it was so soft in comparison and anywhere above 100mm, the Canon lens is much better all round.

With the short end, when I was looking I was considering Sigma 17-70, 18-50 f/2.8 & Tamron 17-50 f/2.8.

I wanted the versatility of the 17-70 but the non-fixed aperture I didn't like. In the end I went with the Tamron, it's a great lens. However I can only compare to the non IS kit lens, but it knocks the socks of that in every way :)
 
Personally I'd get the zoom before upgrading the kit. I think you'll get more benefit doing it that way.

/edit just read the whole thread lol. Good choice :)
 
I would have suggested the Canon myself as well. I was initially after the exact same lens combination (17-70 + 70-300) but after a lot of research and reading of reviews decided to stick with my 18-55 IS and in the near future get the 55-250 IS as well. The sharpness and image stabilization seems to make up for the lower focal length :)
 
The 17-70 is definitely a step up in IQ terms compared to the IS kit lens IMO having owned both, but you obviously lose the extra stops afforded by IS.
 
I totally agree with the above. I got a 17-70 today and already I can tell it's a big improvement over the 18-55 IS.
 
Yup, I'd agree with above two posts.

I have the 450D kit lens, and the Sigma 17-70 is better in every respect, disregarding IS. It's not in a different league, but it is noticably better.

With Jessops now offering it at 195, it's a good time to buy. You can even get a decent return on your kit lens (they regularly leave ebay at 80+)

I'm selling mine if anyone's interested!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top