Feedback Desired: The next lens I'm considering ...

#1 on my "to buy" list is a decent tripod and ball head but I am looking at one particularlens as the next one on my list... the Sigma Zoom Super Wide Angle 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS Lens.


I already have a CanonEF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS & a 55-250mm f/4.5-5.6 IS USM that came with my camera and needless to say are not great but are alright for me for now since I'm just learning.I have also purchased the CanonEF 100mm f/2.8L ISMacro & the EF 300mm f/4L IS Telephoto lens with the EF extender 1.4x and am impatiently awaiting the arrival of my 580 EX II Speedlite.


Since I still need to get the tripod setup, I don't want to spend a great deal of money on another top notch lens but want one that will still perform well for my needs. I mostly shoot photos of wildlife and also my 3 dogs and grandkids running around the house, yard and park.


With all that in mind, I was looking to get a better all around general purpose lens that is easy to walk around with. Granted the Sigma won't perform like aCanon lens but most reviews sound good for it but I am hesitate because I don't want to throw away $360 bucks either.


Should I sell the two Canon kit lenses and replace them with the Sigma?


Thanks in advance for your advice [:)]


Denise

I can be very unhelpful, in saying that I don't know anything about this lens.


I can relate that I used to want a Canon 28-300 zoom lens. After learning, however, about the compromises inherent in increasing the zoom range, I fell out of love with that idea, and never returned to it. For a given level of quality, you'll likely pay more for everything in one lens compared to multiple lenses to get the same quality.


I don't think it's a bad idea, mind you. Having it all in one may very well allow you to get lots of shots that you wouldn't otherwise get. if somebody dropped a 28-300 in my lap, I would give it a chance.


But, it's not a path I chose to pursue. Most of the time, either mount/bring what I think I might need, or just use what I happened to leave on the camera. if i think I might need more than I can do with one lens, I carry two bodies.


I hope that wasn't an utter waste of your time. I'm sorry i couldn't provide any experience with that lens.

Hi Denise,


One thing to keep in mind - your camera body requires least f/5.6 for the autofocus system to work (the 1-series Canon bodies can AF with f/8 lenses). So with the Sigma18-200mm f/3.5-6.3, above 135mm when the max aperture drops to f/6.0, you'll lose the ability to autofocus. That's one reason the maximum aperture on the somewhat more expensive Canon 18-200mm is f/5.6 - so AF will work on all Canon bodies. Also, since the Sigma 18-200mm lens doesn't have full-time manual focusing, you'll need to remember to flip the switch from AF to MF when you zoom past 135mm (then back again if you want AF when you zoom out). All in all, I don't think it's worth the hassle - sort of defeats the purpose of the 18-200mm range convenience, IMO.


If you really want an 11x zoom, save up for the Canon - but, 11x zooms are not high-quality lenses (as Colin points out, even the L-series version has IQ issues). I'm sure you've already noticed the significant quality differences between the two 100mm L macro and the 300mm L telephoto versus your kit lenses. Why spend more $ for low quality? I'd stick with the kit lenses for now, rather than putting more $ into low quality glass. Get the tripod/ballhead (I like my Manfrotto carbon fiber setup), and save up for lenses such as the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 (or the the 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6), and one of the L-series 70-200mm lenses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

Hi Denise,


One thing to keep in mind - your camera body requires least f/5.6 for the autofocus system to work (the 1-series Canon bodies can AF with f/8 lenses). So with the Sigma18-200mm f/3.5-6.3, above 135mm when the max aperture drops to f/6.0, you'll lose the ability to autofocus. That's one reason the maximum aperture on the somewhat more expensive Canon 18-200mm is f/5.6 - so AF will work on all Canon bodies. Also, since the Sigma 18-200mm lens doesn't have full-time manual focusing, you'll need to remember to flip the switch from AF to MF when you zoom past 135mm (then back again if you want AF when you zoom out). All in all, I don't think it's worth the hassle - sort of defeats the purpose of the 18-200mm range convenience, IMO.


If you really want an 11x zoom, save up for the Canon - but, 11x zooms are not high-quality lenses (as Colin points out, even the L-series version has IQ issues). I'm sure you've already noticed the significant quality differences between the two 100mm L macro and the 300mm L telephoto versus your kit lenses. Why spend more $ for low quality? I'd stick with the kit lenses for now, rather than putting more $ into low quality glass. Get the tripod/ballhead (I like my Manfrotto carbon fiber setup), and save up for lenses such as the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 (or the the 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6), and one of the L-series 70-200mm lenses.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

---

Your info was extremely helpful and you have succeeded in convincing me to wait it out. Earlier, I was highly considering the lenses you suggested but I guess i thought I had found an easy and inexpensive way out but even as mentioned by Colin, the price I'd pay for compromising quality wouldn't be worth it.


Thanks again ...Denise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colin

I can relate that I used to want a Canon 28-300 zoom lens. After learning, however, about the compromises inherent in increasing the zoom range, I fell out of love with that idea, and never returned to it. For a given level of quality, you'll likely pay more for everything in one lens compared to multiple lenses to get the same quality.

---

Thank you for your response and it was indeed very helpful and you are right, the compromises would make it not worth it.


Denise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

One thing to keep in mind - your camera body requires least f/5.6 for the autofocus system to work (the 1-series Canon bodies can AF with f/8 lenses). So with the Sigma18-200mm f/3.5-6.3, above 135mm when the max aperture drops to f/6.0, you'll lose the ability to autofocus. That's one reason the maximum aperture on the somewhat more expensive Canon 18-200mm is f/5.6 - so AF will work on all Canon bodies. Also, since the Sigma 18-200mm lens doesn't have full-time manual focusing, you'll need to remember to flip the switch from AF to MF when you zoom past 135mm (then back again if you want AF when you zoom out). All in all, I don't think it's worth the hassle - sort of defeats the purpose of the 18-200mm range convenience, IMO.

---

That is a common misunderstanding. The f3.5-6.3 zooms I've used focused fine along their entire range. I'm not sure why though--maybe they are chipped to tell the camera f/5.6?


If you want a 18-200mm lens, Denise, I'd recommend the Canon version.

Yes, why not the Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ddt0725

I mostly shoot photos of wildlife and also my 3 dogs and grandkids running around the house, yard and park.

---

Denise, in my opinion what you already have covers most of these uses. If I were you I wouldn't rush to buy another lens as you already have a pretty good kit (much better than mine). I think an 18-200 lens is a bit frivolous as it is only slightly better than your 55-250.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ddt0725

Since I still need to get the tripod setup, I don't want to spend a great deal of money on another top notch lens but want one that will still perform well for my needs.

---

I would buy the tripod, and save for, yes, another top-notch lens. Meanwhile, use your 100 macro as a general telephoto lens. It's fast, sharp and has good AF. In a few months or whenever, sell your kit lenses and drop it all on a 70-200 2.8.


[H]


brendan

Thanks Brendan, you are so right ...I need to give it more time and see all of what the lenses I have can do for me and concentrate on getting the better tripod. And yes, the Canon 70-200 2.8 sure looks like a good one for me to save up for.


Denise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ddt0725

Thanks Brendan, you are so right ...I need to give it more time and see all of what the lenses I have can do for me and concentrate on getting the better tripod. And yes, the Canon 70-200 2.8 sure looks like a good one for me to save up for.


well, the 70-200 is my personal choice, you have to like it yourself, but you get the idea. And my best advice is: practice! practice without ceasing.


remember that equipment doesn't do everything. I shoot birds with my 300 f/4. I have tried the 500 f/4. While it was better, my lack of experience and expertise would have negated any benefit new equipment would have offered me, and would have wasted an extra $4000. (lot of moolah)





brendan

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShutterbugJohan

That is a common misunderstanding. The f3.5-6.3 zooms I've used focused fine along their entire range. I'm not sure why though--maybe they are chipped to tell the camera f/5.6?

---

Thanks for correcting me! It would make sense that the lens is chipped to give 'false' or no information on maximum aperture to the body (similar to the 'tape-the-pins' trick that can allow AF on too-slow Canon combinations like a teleconverter with a lens that's already f/5.6). That also makes Bryan's warning about current 3rd party lenses possibly not working with future Canon bodies very relevant, I would think.

Hi Denise,


As others have pointed out, you have great quality in the telephoto range already, with the 100mm f/2.8L Macro and the 300mm f/4L.


If you're looking for better image quality in the lower end of your shooting range, you might consider another prime lens such as the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM ($350 on Amazon), the very inexpensive but still sharp 'nifty-fifty' (EF 50mm f/1.8 II, $100 on Amazon), or for a more 'normal' perspective the EF 35mm f/2 ($320 on Amazon). Any of those will have better image quality than the kit lens covering that range, better build quality (except for the 50mm f/1.8 which is similar in quality to the kit lens), and also much wider apertures allowing ambient light pictures indoors or in low light. Compared to the kit lens at 50mm, which is at f/5.6, the 50mm f/1.4 is 4 stops faster, meaning 16 times more light. Yes, the kit lens has 4 stops of IS - the difference is that 4 stops of aperture means the ability to use a shutter speed fast enough to freeze the motion of those running grandkids.


[:)]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ddt0725

Should I sell the two Canon kit lenses and replace them with the Sigma?

---

If you want the convenience of an 11X superzoom, go for it!


But you should be aware that the quality will be much lower than your 18-55 and 55-250. Also be aware that some users have issues with autofocus on that Sigma superzoom.