Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 DC Macro + Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM Lens

[Walt]

Mrs Walt wants to know what i want for my birthday in january (can i go back 50 years and see if i can get it right next time)
What do you think to the above pair for my Canon 350, dont want to go crazy with the budget and think these will fit my needs quite well.
Any suggestions or feedback on either of the 2 would be muchly appreciated :thumbsdown:

 

[markta]

Someone will come along who actually has the lenses, but from what I have read about the two, the Sigma is very good and sharp, but AF is a tad slow at the zoom end.

The Canon is a good lens at the budget end of the scale, but is a little soft at the 300mm end. This is also shown in sample images I've seen.

 

[marky_h]

I used to have the Siggy with my 350D - very good lens, sharp (I've not seen any reported problems over quality control with these lenses, unlike some of the Sigma stable), and a nice bokeh. It's a very handy walkaround focal range too. The only minor quibble is that it's not f/2.8 for long - about 5mm, I seem to recall , but it's a pretty small point. Example shots:

 

[stan the man]

i'd agree with markta with regards to the 17-70..it's a cracker of a lens,and far better than the kit lens it replaced,but can be a little slow at focussing at the narrow end,but not painfully so..i'm more than happy with mine,and can highly recommend it....

some sample shots with it..

being a sony man, i have no experience of the latter,sorry!

 

[mbscad]

Hi Walt,
I have the 70-300IS and I love it.
Not too shabby at 300mm either.

 

[Walt]

Thanks all, it looks like these may be the 2 i go for, definitely as far as the siggy is concerned, may do a bit more research regarding the canon though.

 

[Smiffy]

I have the Sigma 17-70 albeit fitted to my Sony.
Well chuffed with it, pin sharp images.
Rob

 

[Walt]

Cheers Rob, everyone seems to comment on how sharp the images are with the Sigma, which is what its all about at the end of the day

 

[InkZ]

Well happy with my 17-70, my first lens

 

[teddyt72]

Hi Walt,

I have these very 2 lenses. The sigma is superb, great for the money and works fine for me.

I actually prefer the Canon in terms of overall pic quality - it gets very good reviews, some calling it a "secret L" - Canon's pro lenses.

e.g. http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/200-canon-ef-70-300mm-f4-56-usm-is-test-report--review

Photozone is pretty good for reviews in general, I'd say.

When I was buying this lens some suggested I could fork out a little more for the 70-200 FL (non IS) as it's probably only £100 more, certainly second hand. I personally didn't fancy walking around with a great white lump on my camera in London!! Worth considering though.

Good luck,
Eddie.

 

[teddyt72]

A few pics from both (don't blame the lenses for my poor photography!!)

Canon 70-300

Sigma 17-70

Eddie

 

[Tysonator]

I have a Sigma 17-70 Dc macro and the Canon 70-300 IS USM. The 17-70 I use all the time as it is a very good replacement for the standard lens. I agree with the above that the f2.8-4.5 is not the same through out the focal length. Apart from that it i sgreat lens, sharp images as well.

 

[Walt]

Thanks all, i did consider the 70-200 Eddie but all ready have a cheap sigma that stops at 200 and find its often a bit short. Thats it then all thats left now is to shop arround for the best deal to try to save a bit of the wifes housekeeping
Once again thanks for all the help.

 

[Walt]

Checked out both lenses on photozone, the Canon 70-300 seems to get a really good review, and the Sigma 17-70 didnt fair to bad either.

 

[Moff]

Wow, some amazing pics...

 

[Walt]

Thats what i thought Moff

 

[dcash29]

Save your money and purchase the sigma 17-70 there is only a fraction (and i mean a fraction) of difference to a Canon 17-40L and thats with a x10 glass. For the 70-300 IS there is a comparision on the net that proves its nearly as good as a 300L lens, in fact its known as an L lens in disguise

Dave

 

[Smiffy]

Wow, some amazing pics...

They are all good, but that first one with the 70-300 (painted man) is a notch above......
Fantastic capture