300D + Sigma 70-300 or Canon 100-300?

Hi,

I recently bought a Canon EOS 300D and now I want to buy a telelens with
decent range to be able to make pictures of more or less distant animals and
other interesting subjects in the distance. I have searched for information
and prices on zoom telelenses and have narrowed my options to the:
- Sigma 70-300/4.0-5.6 APO Macro Super II;
- Canon EF 100-300/4.5-5.6 USM.

Both are priced about equally and seem to get relatively good reviews (taken
into account that these are relatively cheap lenses). My budget is limited
so the often recommended L-lenses are no options. I have found comparisons
between different lenses, with example pictures to show the differences in
image quality. That's how I filtered most of the lenses away and ended up
with these two options. They are about equally priced with the Canon lens
only some 50 Euro's above the Sigma. But now I need to make a choice: should
I go for the Canon or the Sigma? I haven't been able to find good
comparisons between these two lenses. Maybe someone in this group knows
these types of lenses and is willing to give me advice on which to buy to
use with the EOS 300D. Any help is greatly appreciated!

Marcel
The Netherlands

 

Go for the Canon Lens! How can you go
wrong when it is the same brand? :+)

"Marcel Alsemgeest" <>
wrote in message

now I want to buy a telelens with

pictures of more or less distant animals
and

distance. I have searched for
information

to get relatively good reviews (taken

cheap lenses). My budget is limited

no options. I have found comparisons

pictures to show the differences in

most of the lenses away and ended up

equally priced with the Canon lens

But now I need to make a choice: should

Maybe someone in this group knows

to give me advice on which to buy to

 

Add a few $ and go for the Canon 75-300 f4-5,6 with IS, worth every penny.

Jean

 

All things being equal, stick with Canon. The Sigma lacks their version of
USM, called HSM, the Canon has true ring motor USM, which is fast and quiet.

 

Sigma makes the 3 best lenses available in this range, the first is
the 120-300mm EX with a constant f/2.8, but it sells for up to $2500,
the second is actually a tad sharper but a stop slower and goes for
around $800, thankfully the world's third place lens in this range is
the Sigma 70-300 APO you mention above, and it's only $200. Here
you'll find them rated next to Canon L, which is not remotely
competive with anything but the Sigma 70-300 APO, and even compared to
that Canon L glass loses...

http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm#Ztelel

The cheaper Canon lens you are considering should be avoided. Even
the 70-300 in Sigma's 24-70/70-300 two lens starter kit is as good.
In fact the 24-70 in that kit is an outstanding lens for the money, so
you'll definitely want to buy that first. The Sigma two lens kit is
$150 in total.

Realize that most Canon users seem to feel the need to rationalize
their expense. Canon L glass is not competitive in the range you
want, although the Canon 300mm IS L prime is a very nice lens.

 

Can you manage to stretch your budget to $500? Because if you can, you can
find the Canon 70-200 f4 L lens for that price used on ebay or photo forums
for sale boards on the internet.

 

In that case, you'd be crazy not to get the Sigma 70-200 EX with a constant f/2.8.

 

I agree. After the piece of junk has fallen apart in short order he'll
have learned a valuable lesson in life...don't buy crap.

 

I actually did learn that lesson the hard way when the permanent
cardboard lens hood on my Canon 300mm L prime was partially partly
torn off by a twig. Now my $1450 lens has $0 resale.

 

I'll give you $10 plus actual shipping costs for it.

Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

 

In message <>,

 

Man talk about SPF 6,000 You must have some thick skin ;-)
Sorry couldn't resist.

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

 

Plus it is steel, not cardboard. Parts of Canon's pricey $1500 300mm
L prime are cardboard.

 

Amazing! You're both right *and* full of shit in the same sentence.

 

I couldn't agree more. Especially, if you don't have a tripod, you should be
able to hand hold this one reasonably well.

Steve

 

Well, yes, that may have been a little high, the cardboard tubed Canon
L 300mm L goes for around $1400 street.

 

(Georgette Preddy) somehow managed to post:

For best results, take the equipment *out* of the box.

 

The $1400 Canon's tube is made of painted cardboard, so it's
definitley best to leave this lens in the box for protection.

 

Shut up, Preddy