Which Lens is better?

DeSwitch · 10th November 2005

I'm thinking of getting a zoom lens for my 350D to suppliment the Kit lens and 50mm f1.8 USM.

I am getting a low cost lens becaust I will not be using much of the long range but will need to use occasionally.

The lens I had narrow down are between:

Canon 75-300mm f4-5.6 USM III
Sigma APO 70-300mm f 4-5.6 DG Macro

Can someone here give some pointer on which is better. cost wise the sigma is cheaper @ $330 while the Canon is $500.
Had considered the Canon 70-200mm f4 USM but right now I do not have the budget.

Thanks in advance.

Isaiahfortythirtyone · 10th November 2005

the canon is soft. lacks sharpness. get the sigma instead. 320 with gst at MScolor. one of the best budget zooms available. use the money saved to buy a good filter like the hoya DMC

DeSwitch · 10th November 2005

Thanks Isaiahfortythirtyone,

Do you know what is the lens drive mechanism for the sigma lens?

madmacs · 10th November 2005

yup...sigma

maritimus831 · 10th November 2005

u must be kidding...the canon is not $500! unless u are talking about the IS version, but then again, the IS version costs alot more than $500. u can buy the Canon 75-300 USM at $365.

comparing the two, the canon is softer, with colours more mild,
while the sigma is slightly sharper, more saturated colour (due to the APO).
ONLY reason for u to buy the Canon is because it focuses faster due to USM. but then again, the sigma focuses pretty fast too, just a wee bit slower.
also, sigma represents greater value as it comes with a lens case and lens hood, while u have to buy these two separately for the canon.

its really a PITA that canon is so stingy, not even bothering to give a lens hood for all its lenses that are not part of the L series. these hoods are extremely hard to find too, most of the time they are out of stock.

if u dun need such a long lens, and have the cash to spare, do consider the
Sigma 24-70mm f2.8EX DG Macro. i have just bought it, and i have nothing but praise for it! it is incredibly sharp, and has nice saturated colour too. also, it is a 'pro'series lens, so it has better build, and fast 2.8 aperture. i bought mine for 670 at MSCOLOR

DeSwitch · 10th November 2005

Thanks,

The Sigma lens looks like a better buy. Focusing speed by a wee bit slower will not make any difference to me as I do not usually take action photos.

Thought the Canon 70-300 USM III (non IS) is $500 as per the canon price guide, I didnt make inquiry on this lens. MS quote me $330 yesterday for the Sigma.

JediForce4ever · 12th November 2005

Originally Posted by De'Switch

Thanks,

The Sigma lens looks like a better buy. Focusing speed by a wee bit slower will not make any difference to me as I do not usually take action photos.

Thought the Canon 70-300 USM III (non IS) is $500 as per the canon price guide, I didnt make inquiry on this lens. MS quote me $330 yesterday for the Sigma.

price guide from Canon always quote a higher price than those in stalls

anyway...Sigma is what you should go for....no point getting a softer and more expensive lens IMO..

monyat · 13th November 2005

Hi all,

New member to this forum... am thinking of splashing out $$ on a budget SLR. Shortlisted the Nikon D50 and Konica Minolta Dynax 5D... probably going for the Dynax 5D cos of the Anti-Shake function... have question to ask: For the Dynax 5D, the package may come with KM 75-300mm lens (pay S$100 more at Harvey Norman).

Any opinion whether this lens is good as compared to Sigma APO 70-300mm f 4-5.6 DG Macro (which I heard good reviews from you people)... please help to advise as this will affect my buying decision, thanks!

DeSwitch · 14th November 2005

Thanks for advise given. I bought the sigma 70-300 lens and went to test shoot. Overall AF speed is quite fast and colour saturation and sharpness is good. (But cameraman aka me here is lousy) For Macro, cant really hand held at 300mm or was it because my hand is shakely.. Will do more pratice shoots next weekend.

aspire · 14th November 2005

Originally Posted by De'Switch

Thanks for advise given. I bought the sigma 70-300 lens and went to test shoot. Overall AF speed is quite fast and colour saturation and sharpness is good. (But cameraman aka me here is lousy) For Macro, cant really hand held at 300mm or was it because my hand is shakely.. Will do more pratice shoots next weekend.

Good lens, u just need to practice more and shoot with a faster speed!

Canew · 14th November 2005

Originally Posted by aspire

Good lens, u just need to practice more and shoot with a faster speed!

AND don't eat chicken legs!

DeSwitch · 14th November 2005

Originally Posted by aspire

Good lens, u just need to practice more and shoot with a faster speed!

YUP, need lots and lots of practice and that what a DSLR is good for, no negative to develop and can get instant preview.

Thanks for advise.

Canew, asking me not to eat yr share is it? Ok lor, next time we go for lunch you can have my chicken legs.... Hahahaha

aspire · 14th November 2005

Originally Posted by Canew

AND don't eat chicken legs!

i don't get the both of you.

Canew · 14th November 2005

Originally Posted by aspire

i don't get the both of you.

aspire, chicken legs are believed to affect the steadiness of one's hands.

aspire · 14th November 2005

Originally Posted by Canew

aspire, chicken legs are believed to affect the steadiness of one's hands.

Oh, pardon me for my ignorance, because I don't eat them.

Canew · 14th November 2005

Originally Posted by aspire

Oh, pardon me for my ignorance, because I don't eat them.

The key word is: 'believed' to affect...

madmacs · 14th November 2005

Originally Posted by De'Switch

Thanks for advise given. I bought the sigma 70-300 lens and went to test shoot. Overall AF speed is quite fast and colour saturation and sharpness is good. (But cameraman aka me here is lousy) For Macro, cant really hand held at 300mm or was it because my hand is shakely.. Will do more pratice shoots next weekend.

for macro and above 300mm you may want to consider getting some support like a monopod. not easy to handhold.

DeSwitch · 14th November 2005

Originally Posted by madmacs

for macro and above 300mm you may want to consider getting some support like a monopod. not easy to handhold.

But using a tripod or monopod for macro will restrict the mobility to react to the subject especially butterflies that fly here and there. I'm just picking up macro and had been looking at some great post here in the Macro section.

Will definately use tripod or monopod for still life.

madmacs · 14th November 2005

Originally Posted by De'Switch

But using a tripod or monopod for macro will restrict the mobility to react to the subject especially butterflies that fly here and there. I'm just picking up macro and had been looking at some great post here in the Macro section.

Will definately use tripod or monopod for still life.

shooting butterflies is an exercise in patience. you dun wanna go chasing after them. nevermind...let you try shooting butterflies handheld first

DeSwitch · 15th November 2005

Originally Posted by sk_2

hi, congrats on your choice of purchase,
value for $

so far it performed ok,
as long the lighting condition is favourable,
looking 4wrd 2 test-drive e" babe shooting mode " @ SingExpo/Auto Salon

Marco mode here,

one of the thing i notice is that the small marco button on the lens barrel tends to get sticky.......
( switchable from 200-300mm onward for near focusing )
when you need to revert back to normal ( 200mm and below focus range )

how does you guys overcome it ?

thnks n

Yup, I encountered that too. I have a solution of my own. I switch the AF to manual first and then manual focus (turn anticlockwise). Then the macro switch will be very easy to switch back to normal mode.

Babes photos are not for me yet cos my skill are too low standard. I will master Macro first.

10th November 2005	#1
DeSwitch Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: 1.45N 103.83E Posts: 2,745	Which Lens is better? I'm thinking of getting a zoom lens for my 350D to suppliment the Kit lens and 50mm f1.8 USM. I am getting a low cost lens becaust I will not be using much of the long range but will need to use occasionally. The lens I had narrow down are between: Canon 75-300mm f4-5.6 USM III Sigma APO 70-300mm f 4-5.6 DG Macro Can someone here give some pointer on which is better. cost wise the sigma is cheaper @ $330 while the Canon is $500. Had considered the Canon 70-200mm f4 USM but right now I do not have the budget. Thanks in advance. Last edited by DeSwitch; 10th November 2005 at 10:04 PM.

10th November 2005	#2
Isaiahfortythirtyone Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Clementi Posts: 2,470	Re: Which Lens is better? the canon is soft. lacks sharpness. get the sigma instead. 320 with gst at MScolor. one of the best budget zooms available. use the money saved to buy a good filter like the hoya DMC

10th November 2005	#3
DeSwitch Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: 1.45N 103.83E Posts: 2,745	Re: Which Lens is better? Thanks Isaiahfortythirtyone, Do you know what is the lens drive mechanism for the sigma lens?

10th November 2005	#4
madmacs Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 5,436	Re: Which Lens is better? yup...sigma

10th November 2005	#5
maritimus831 Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 175	Re: Which Lens is better? u must be kidding...the canon is not $500! unless u are talking about the IS version, but then again, the IS version costs alot more than $500. u can buy the Canon 75-300 USM at $365. comparing the two, the canon is softer, with colours more mild, while the sigma is slightly sharper, more saturated colour (due to the APO). ONLY reason for u to buy the Canon is because it focuses faster due to USM. but then again, the sigma focuses pretty fast too, just a wee bit slower. also, sigma represents greater value as it comes with a lens case and lens hood, while u have to buy these two separately for the canon. its really a PITA that canon is so stingy, not even bothering to give a lens hood for all its lenses that are not part of the L series. these hoods are extremely hard to find too, most of the time they are out of stock. if u dun need such a long lens, and have the cash to spare, do consider the Sigma 24-70mm f2.8EX DG Macro. i have just bought it, and i have nothing but praise for it! it is incredibly sharp, and has nice saturated colour too. also, it is a 'pro'series lens, so it has better build, and fast 2.8 aperture. i bought mine for 670 at MSCOLOR

10th November 2005	#6
DeSwitch Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: 1.45N 103.83E Posts: 2,745	Re: Which Lens is better? Thanks, The Sigma lens looks like a better buy. Focusing speed by a wee bit slower will not make any difference to me as I do not usually take action photos. Thought the Canon 70-300 USM III (non IS) is $500 as per the canon price guide, I didnt make inquiry on this lens. MS quote me $330 yesterday for the Sigma.

13th November 2005	#8
monyat Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: NorthEast Posts: 208	Re: Which Lens is better? Hi all, New member to this forum... am thinking of splashing out $$ on a budget SLR. Shortlisted the Nikon D50 and Konica Minolta Dynax 5D... probably going for the Dynax 5D cos of the Anti-Shake function... have question to ask: For the Dynax 5D, the package may come with KM 75-300mm lens (pay S$100 more at Harvey Norman). Any opinion whether this lens is good as compared to Sigma APO 70-300mm f 4-5.6 DG Macro (which I heard good reviews from you people)... please help to advise as this will affect my buying decision, thanks!

14th November 2005	#9
DeSwitch Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: 1.45N 103.83E Posts: 2,745	Re: Which Lens is better? Thanks for advise given. I bought the sigma 70-300 lens and went to test shoot. Overall AF speed is quite fast and colour saturation and sharpness is good. (But cameraman aka me here is lousy) For Macro, cant really hand held at 300mm or was it because my hand is shakely.. Will do more pratice shoots next weekend.