Input Sought on Lens

[Bob Hartig]

Who here has used either the Tamron, the ProMaster, or the Sigma 70-300mm AF lens with macro for Canon cameras? At around $200, this is not at all a pricey lens, but it seems to pack some bang for the buck. I'd very much welcome input from those who are familiar with it, and also recommendations within the same price range, if you feel something else might serve better. The glass will be primarily used for nature and outdoor photography.

 

[Scott Weberpal]

I have the Sigma 70-300 AF macro. I don't use telephoto much so I didn't want to spend a ton. I have been very happy with its performance and would definitely recommend it if you are looking for a decent telephoto at a reasonable price. Obviously it has huge limitations in low-light, but I can't remember a single time in my life I've needed a fast lens shooting anything over 100mm.

This was shot at 300mm
http://www.tornadofx.com/sandhill/051009_sandhill18.jpg

Macro:
http://www.tornadofx.com/stormtrack/081608_01.jpg

 

[Cris Schroeder]

I have a Quantaray 70-300mm, which is a relabeled Sigma. My wife bought it for my birthday after I got my first EOS SLR. It is slow, has a slow and noisy autofocus, and has some serious vignetting issues, but it's hard to bag on it too much considering the price. I don't use it much, but when I need it, I'm glad I have it. It gives an equivalent of 480mm of reach on my XTi. I've found I have to bump up the ISO significantly to keep my shutter speeds high to avoid blurring due to vibration.

If I needed a big zoom more often, I'd spring for some L glass with image stabilization.

Here are a few shots I've taken with the lens:

 

[Bob Hartig]

Thank you very much, gents. I see that both of you own the Sigma. The newer version with AFO has gotten some excellent reviews, and I'm now leaning heavily toward it over the Tamron/ProMaster, which has gotten more mixed reviews and doesn't offer the glass treatment of the Sigma.

Your input, and all input on this forum, is most helpful. There are a lot of excellent, equipment-savvy photographers on Stormtrack.

 

[Patrick Martin]

To toss out another option, have you considered the Canon EFS 55-250is? I'm not sure if the 250mm will be enough reach with what you are shooting, or if it is to much overlap with what you already have? It is a little more (about $250) than the other's but not by much, and used ones can be found on a Canon forum for around $200. It's certainly not an "L" lens, but then again, anything in this price range won't be. I own this lens, and it can produce some pretty snappy results, and has IS. When you consider the cost, it's not a bad lens.

 

[Mike Deep]

Also consider finding one of the old 70-210 USM lenses from the mid-90's. It's a fine performer, pretty compact and most importantly has that USM focusing unit. Runs about $100-200 used.

 

[Ryan McGinnis]

Who here has used either the Tamron, the ProMaster, or the Sigma 70-300mm AF lens with macro for Canon cameras? At around $200, this is not at all a pricey lens, but it seems to pack some bang for the buck. I'd very much welcome input from those who are familiar with it, and also recommendations within the same price range, if you feel something else might serve better. The glass will be primarily used for nature and outdoor photography.

The Sigma 70-200 2.8 lens is a much, much better lens than the 70-300. Probably the best bang-for-the-buck telephoto lens out there is the Canon 70-200 f/4 IS. I realize that these aren't anywhere in the same price range, but it's really, really hard to get good quality lenses for cheap, unless you're lucky enough to have a camera that is still compatible with some of the old manual-focus lenses of yore.

The problem with nature photography is that the lenses used are some of the priciest. Most photographers who get heavy into nature (professionally) eventually end up purchasing something like the Canon or Nikon 500 f/4.

 

[Bob Hartig]

Thanks, all, for sharing your knowledge and advice. Ryan, I appreciate your input, particularly since I love your photography. However, the price right now is a clincher, and so is the macro feature. I just don't have the money required to buy a higher-end, or even a medium-priced, Canon lens. In any event, I read your post after I had already pulled the trigger.

Having read good to glowing reviews about the Sigma, including those here by Scott and Chris, as compared to the Tamron's more mixed reviews, I went to Norman Camera this evening and tried out the Sigma. I had already tried the Tamron a couple days ago, so I had good grounds for comparison. The Sigma is clearly the superior lens--crisper image quality, faster focusing, more solid construction, and APO. After snapping a few photos and viewing the results, I was impressed enough that I bought it. The lens is a birthday gift for my lady friend, Lisa, who used to own the ProMaster version of the Tamron and really liked it. Feels good to get her something that's noticeably better to replace it.

Again, thanks to all of you for your input.