Canon EF 75-300mm vs. Sigma 70-300mm APO

In another thread (http://www.photographycorner.com/viewtopic.php?t=5229) a few of us have been discussing which inexpensive telephoto zoom lenses to get. It looks like the two main contenders are the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM (http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=150&modelid=7444) and the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO Super II Macro (http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3240&navigator=3). They're both around $200US which I know for me is just about the price I can possibly afford at the moment. I haven't found any side by side comparisons of these two lenses but I have found reviews of each of them seperately. I know that Kyle and Leptokurtotic have both used the Sigma. I'm wondering has anyone else used either of these lenses? If you have, could you give us any opinions. I'd also love to hear any suggestions for similar lenses in terms of focal range and price range.

I've used the Sigma, not very happy with it. Doesn't give me the sharpness nor does it focus close enough.

Patman10, just for clarification, was it the APO version of the lens?

Yes 70-300mm F4-5.6II APO Macro super!

I've been scouring threads for info on these lenses. Here are some quotes about the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO Super II Macro:

Leptokurtotic:
I used on of those Sigma 70-300's on my Pentax. It's an acceptable lens, but pretty tough to get consistently good results at 300. The Macro feature is fairly hard to use effectively because the minimum focusing distance is around 1m at 1:2.
Note: I noticed in a different thread than this one that he said the Sigma 70-300 he had wasn't an APO. Lepto, could you confirm that for me?

Kyle:
It's great. good for sports, nature, macro. It's fun being able to get up close and personal. The auto focus is a bit noisy on this model compared to the Canon USM, but I have not had any problems with it.

Kara:
Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO

I wouldnt waste my money on this lens. Fine if your going to shoot outdoors, but its really slow - read the reviews.

Soopah, I know you have or at least had the Canon 75-300. I'd love to hear your comments on it.

the Sigma 70-300 he had wasn't an APO


You are correct.

I've used the Sigma, not very happy with it. Doesn't give me the sharpness nor does it focus close enough.


I am not sure how close the Canon can focus, but I think at the price range we are looking at you you get what you pay for. When I have this issue I alway make sure I am on macro mode of pull back. I don't have a problem with sharpness as long as I keep my shutter speed above my focal length or use a tripod.

I think the Canon lenses have better auto-focusing technilogies, and as a result might be faster than the Sigma.

I wound up buying the 105mm Micro Nikor for Macro use and I love it averything I expected and more.

So I'm throwing another lens into the mix now. Canon EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM (http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=150&modelid=7339). The price is a little closer to $300 but in general it seems to be getting better reviews (http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/x-300.html). It also has the ring USM instead of the micro USM which is unanimously regarded as being much better and allows for full time manual focus. Since I'm focusing on getting some distance and not so much on doing macro with it, I think this is the direction I'm leaning at the moment.

I have the Sigma 50-500 which I am very happy with!

I have the Sigma 50-500 which I am very happy with!

Cool, I'll keep that in mind for the future. It's definitely out of my price range at the moment. I've already been eyeing the Sigma 170-500mm for the future. I've seen some excellent photos from it, particularly from Greaper. But that's in the future when I've saved up some cash. Patman10 I really appreciate all the input you're giving me.

So I'm throwing another lens into the mix now. Canon EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM.


i think I would have gone with this one too. But I could not spend the extra cash at the time..

I have the Sigma 135-400 APO it is quite soft at 400 but very respectible performance through the rest range.

I think if you want performance at a specific focal length then opt for a prime lens whether it's the macro or telephoto ends.

Just get this. The ATX f/2.8 lenses have gotten really good reviews on sites like fredmiranda.com. They're signifigantly less expensive than a manufactuer brand f/2.8 lens. It will be my next purchase.

http://www.thkphoto.com/products/tokina/afl-05.html

Well if you want a very nice lense, theres the Canon Telephoto EF 600mm f/4.0L IS Image Stabilizer USM Autofocus Lens USA, for $7,199.95us. I thought I heard Canon made a $100,000 lense used by pro's for sports mag's, but I didnt find it.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home;jsessionid=CYvnvvQB1J!-183243993?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=186153&is=USA

Just to shake things up, I have the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L usm. It was pricey but O.M.G.!! Almost sorry I didn't find another $200 for the IS version.

(I know, not what you are looking for) ;)

(I know, not what you are looking for)

Maybe not, but I sure would like one. I just read your post in the equipment list thread and was getting jealous when I saw this lens in it. :mrgreen:

Their seems to be about a $1000 difference between the 70-200 is and ef $597.34 EF & $1699.99 for IS. Since I use Nikon lenses I have the NIkor 80-200 f2.8D. Beautiful sharp lenses but very large.

I bought the lens for a job that I had booked. Unfortunately the job was cancelled. And I now have this lens which I really wasn't in the market for. So I took it out for a tested drive this weekend. All I can say is OH WOW.

I know there is a huge difference in price, but, I did a tremendous amount of research before I purchased it. The "L" glass series is nothing short of amazing. I was originally going to get the EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Telephoto Zoom, but I needed the lens for lowlight and the f/4L wouldn't do it. So I ended up with its "big brother". I thought I would regret spending the money, but no. I am hooked, spoiled, however you want to say it, these lenses are amazing. I realize that I will be completely broke IF I purchase another "L". I might be broke, but damn I will be happy :)

If you want a real treat get the EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Telephoto Zoom I think it is $589US, you might find it a little cheaper at B&H or Andorama and you will not be disappointed.

If you want a real treat get the EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Telephoto Zoom I think it is $589US, you might find it a little cheaper at B&H or Andorama and you will not be disappointed.

But then I'll be spoiled and expect that kind of quality out of every lens I get. :D You're really trying to tempt me aren't you? Oh the quandary...

Hey Gerry, put me down for two of them! lol

Ahhhh, sweet temptation!!!

It is so easy to get tempted. But then i think of how I would look through my view finder with the black eye I would get from my wife.... :)

Ahhh, the joy of being single. :D

Convince her that you can make money with it.

Im not sure if it was this thread that I read it, I dont think so, another thiing you could do is save up double the price, then buy something for your wife and then youll be ok to spend the other half on the item, hehe.