Sigma 17-70 vs 18-250

sirkuk

sirkuk

Suspended / Banned
Messages
100
Name
Kris
Edit My Images
No
I'm looking to buy a new lens to go on holiday later this year so I don't have to take several different lenses with me and the two I have been considering are the Sigma 17-70 and 18-250.

At the moment I only have a 18-55 kit lens, 50 prime and 50-250 Canon, which cover my needs but would rather only take one lens with me on holiday. The 18-250 Sigma instantly appealed for its range but don't want to sacrifice image quality. How would the 18-250 compare to my current lenses in terms of image quality? However, I do wonder if my money is much better off going towards a 17-70 for a cut in range but improved image quality in the same price range. Any help in the right direction? I just don't want to take a step back in image quality but the convenience of the 18-250 does appeal.
 
Unless you are an image quality freak and you don't need to shoot in low light or sports but rather general shooting and nothing extraordinary you can go for the 18-250 as the 17-70 restricts you to what you currently have and it's not far ahead in terms of quality over the kit lens(the IS kit lens is quite nice when it comes to quality)
 
Thank you plamen. That's very helpful. I must admit there were a few occasions walking around the countryside this weekend where wildlife shots were wasted because I had to switch lenses to my 55-250mm so that just confirms it further.

I can't fault my kit lens but when I see some of the images that come from my 50mm prime, I can't help but wanting something that little bit better for a zoom lens ;)
 
sirkuk said:
Thank you plamen. That's very helpful. I must admit there were a few occasions walking around the countryside this weekend where wildlife shots were wasted because I had to switch lenses to my 55-250mm so that just confirms it further.

I can't fault my kit lens but when I see some of the images that come from my 50mm prime, I can't help but wanting something that little bit better for a zoom lens ;)
Click to expand...

You can't really compare a zoom to a prime though. As said the 18-250 will probably give a drop in IQ compared to what you already have... I would just keep what you have. Mind you if you're adamant that you want that all in one I'd keep the 50mm for low light stuff.
 
Hazza said:
You can't really compare a zoom to a prime though. As said the 18-250 will probably give a drop in IQ compared to what you already have... I would just keep what you have. Mind you if you're adamant that you want that all in one I'd keep the 50mm for low light stuff.
Click to expand...

I get a zoom won't reach the same quality as a prime but wouldn't mind on improving on the image quality of the zoom lenses I have. The main reason I'm after a new lens is to take on holiday so I don't have to carry several lenses with me and a blower to get rid any sensor dust inflicted whilst changing lenses. I realise though going for a long range zoom lens will always be a compromise on quality, hence why I was considering the Sigma 17-70mm as a compromise between quality and focal length.
 
Actually the Sigma 17-70 is a cracking lens and will be far better than your kit lens. I had one for two years before switching to the 17-55 f2.8 and it performed very well indeed.

The 18-250 will not be great in terms of image quality.
 
How about the Canon 18-135mm as another alternative? I never realised they were roughly in the same price range. How does the 18-135mm compare with the Sigma 17-70mm?
 
I've had some cracking images out of my 18-250 and it lives on my 60D when we're travelling. Wide enough to get the close-in stuff and long enough to make sense of anything of interest in the distance.

I'd rather have a not-quite-perfect image than lose the image altogether because either the lens wasn't long enough or it took me too long to swap to my 50-500.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top