«

I am planning on purchasing my first DSLR and am looking at the Canon
Rebel XTi with the kit lense EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-22 . I have an old ef
f/3.5-4.5 35-70mm lense and am planning on getting the 50mm f/1.8
lense. Now my question is aimed at the the longer zoom lense. Which
of these two lense would you get the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Macro or
Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III. I can get either of them for around the
same prince. Which one do you all consider the better of the two
choices.

Just abit about me:
I cannot afford to buy much more than the above. I try to find the
best of the lowest price and go with that.

I like to take photos of almost anything from animals, bugs, rocks,
water and flowers to sporting events and people, spontaneous shots as
well as prestaged ones, both indoors and outdoors during the daytime
and at night. I will even try by hand at some astrophotography thought
my konica z3 doesnt do much here though.

I am thinking the 18-55mm is a decent but not great all around lense.

I am thinking the 50mm is good for lower light and indoor shot as well
as night time sprots activities.

I am thinking the 35-70mm will zoom somewhat more than the 18-55mm
with the 1.6 multilplier making it around a 105mm zoom.

And I am thinking the 70(75)-300 will be the zoom for the distance
shots of all kinds of subjects from animals to the moon.

Is my thinking all correct on the above or am I misinterpreting
something.

I would really be thankful for any positive, meaningful comments,
thoughts, critizisms on what I am about to step into here.

Thanks

DAD

"-dad" <> wrote:
> Which
> of these two lense would you get the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Macro or
> Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III. I can get either of them for around the
> same prince. Which one do you all consider the better of the two
> choices.

The Canon has IS, the Sigma doesn't.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

David J. Littleboy wrote:

>> Which
>> of these two lense would you get the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Macro or
>> Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III. I can get either of them for around the
>> same prince. Which one do you all consider the better of the two
>> choices.
>
> The Canon has IS, the Sigma doesn't.

I think he's asking which one is better? The Sigma clearly has better
optics, but depending on his neds and intended use IS might not be a needed
feature.



Rita

"Rita Ä Berkowitz" <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote:
> David J. Littleboy wrote:
>>> Which
>>> of these two lense would you get the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Macro or
>>> Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III. I can get either of them for around the
>>> same prince. Which one do you all consider the better of the two
>>> choices.
>>
>> The Canon has IS, the Sigma doesn't.
>
> I think he's asking which one is better? The Sigma clearly has better
> optics,

The review at hand rates them identically in terms of optics. You may be
thinking of the earlier model of the Canon, which was pretty iffy optically.
The latest model is reported by the reviews to be a significant improvement.

>but depending on his neds and intended use IS might not be a needed
>feature.

He didn't sound like a guy who's going to own and use a serious tripod. I'd
guess he needs the IS. (Heck, my tripod's bigger than yours, but I wouldn't
buy a non-IS telephoto.)

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

"-dad" <> wrote in message
news:...
>I am planning on purchasing my first DSLR and am looking at the Canon
> Rebel XTi with the kit lense EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-22 . I have an old
> ef
> f/3.5-4.5 35-70mm lense and am planning on getting the 50mm f/1.8
> lense. Now my question is aimed at the the longer zoom lense.
> Which
> of these two lense would you get the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Macro or
> Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III. I can get either of them for around the
> same prince. Which one do you all consider the better of the two
> choices.

No offence, but you're putting crappy lenses on a good 10mp camera.
This is a very common mistake with digital cameras, so don't expect
great results with that kind of setup.

Remember that the lense does all the work in forming an image for the
camera. The sensor in the camera is merely the recording media, just
like film.

If you can't afford better lenses, then I suggest you consider other
camera bodies and use better lenses. Perhaps buy the less expensive
Canon XT model or even a Nikon D50, and put more money into quality
lenses. Don't worry about the megapixel numbers (it's mostly a
marketing game) unless you intend to make large 13x19" or bigger
prints. You only need 3 megapixels to make excellent 8x10 prints.

Or you can hold off getting the 50 and 75-300 lenses, save up and buy
better glass later on.

"David J. Littleboy" <> wrote in message
news:eim1po$rei$...
>
> "-dad" <> wrote:
>> Which
>> of these two lense would you get the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Macro
>> or
>> Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III. I can get either of them for around
>> the
>> same prince. Which one do you all consider the better of the two
>> choices.
>
> The Canon has IS, the Sigma doesn't.


Sorry David, but you're mistaken.

The 70-300 model which costs over twice as much has IS. The cheap
75-300, which is priced similar to the Sigma 70-300 Macro, does not.

"-dad" <> wrote in message
news:...
>I am planning on purchasing my first DSLR and am looking at the Canon
> Rebel XTi with the kit lense EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-22 . I have an old ef
> f/3.5-4.5 35-70mm lense and am planning on getting the 50mm f/1.8
> lense. Now my question is aimed at the the longer zoom lense. Which
> of these two lense would you get the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Macro or
> Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III. I can get either of them for around the
> same prince. Which one do you all consider the better of the two
> choices.

I can't comment on the Canon tele, but I own and use the Sigma lens and I
have been extremely happy with it at the price.

Even at the highest zoom, the pictures are clean and crisp, the AF is fast
and responsive. I have taken photos of the moon with it, and was amazed at
the detail it brought out (I use a Canon 350D). I would recommend that if
you get a telephoto of that length you also invest in a tripod for the
really distant work (like the moon).

"Bill" <> wrote:
> "David J. Littleboy" <> wrote:
>>
>> "-dad" <> wrote:
>>> Which
>>> of these two lense would you get the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Macro or
>>> Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III. I can get either of them for around the
>>> same prince. Which one do you all consider the better of the two
>>> choices.
>>
>> The Canon has IS, the Sigma doesn't.
>
>
> Sorry David, but you're mistaken.
>
> The 70-300 model which costs over twice as much has IS. The cheap 75-300,
> which is priced similar to the Sigma 70-300 Macro, does not.

http://photo.net/equipment/canon/70-300is/review.html

That's an IS lens.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

"Bill" <> wrote:
>
> No offence, but you're putting crappy lenses on a good 10mp camera. This
> is a very common mistake with digital cameras, so don't expect great
> results with that kind of setup.

You may have a good point. The tiny pixles mean that any infelicities in
resolution or contrast (which actually are the same thing) will show up.

As I mentioned in another note, I'm getting sharp images from the 55-200
plastic junk lens on my 5D, thanks to the fat pixels.

> Remember that the lense does all the work in forming an image for the
> camera. The sensor in the camera is merely the recording media, just like
> film.

Yep. Still, there are some gems amongs the dreck in the cheap lens world;
the Tamron 28-75/2.8 is seriously amazing on the 5D.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

"-dad" <> wrote in message
news:...
>I am planning on purchasing my first DSLR and am looking at the Canon
> Rebel XTi with the kit lense EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-22 . I have an old ef
> f/3.5-4.5 35-70mm lense and am planning on getting the 50mm f/1.8
> lense. Now my question is aimed at the the longer zoom lense. Which
> of these two lense would you get the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Macro or
> Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III. I can get either of them for around the
> same prince. Which one do you all consider the better of the two
> choices.
>
> Just abit about me:
> I cannot afford to buy much more than the above. I try to find the
> best of the lowest price and go with that.
>
> I like to take photos of almost anything from animals, bugs, rocks,
> water and flowers to sporting events and people, spontaneous shots as
> well as prestaged ones, both indoors and outdoors during the daytime
> and at night. I will even try by hand at some astrophotography thought
> my konica z3 doesnt do much here though.
>
> I am thinking the 18-55mm is a decent but not great all around lense.
>
> I am thinking the 50mm is good for lower light and indoor shot as well
> as night time sprots activities.
>
> I am thinking the 35-70mm will zoom somewhat more than the 18-55mm
> with the 1.6 multilplier making it around a 105mm zoom.
>
> And I am thinking the 70(75)-300 will be the zoom for the distance
> shots of all kinds of subjects from animals to the moon.
>
> Is my thinking all correct on the above or am I misinterpreting
> something.
>
> I would really be thankful for any positive, meaningful comments,
> thoughts, critizisms on what I am about to step into here.

Sigma makes two 70-300mm F4-5.6 lenses: the DG Macro and the APO DG Macro.
The DG Macro is OK at best, the APO DG Macro is a very good lens for the
money. I'd pass on the non-APO version. You can tell the difference by
noting that the APO version has the red ring around the barrel.