Sigma 18-250mm vs Canon 70-300mm

[mitchel]

<p class="first"]I currently own the Canon XTi w/ Canon 17-85mm lens and I am looking for some more zoom to capture candid shots because the 85mm is kind of lacking.


If I get the Sigma I get a lot of convenience because I don't have to switch lenses and possibly miss the moment. I do however have a lot of overlap with my current lens. This is a pretty new lens.


If I get the Canon I get a little more zoom and maybe better image quality because the lens does not have to cover so much zoom. I do run the risk of missing the photo because I have to swap lenses. This is a pretty old lens.


I am not a pro, just like to take family photos and general stuff. I usually upload to my web site or print 4x6 prints and maybe the occasional 8x10.


So with all that said...what do you think?
<p class="last"]Mitch

[Daniel Browning]

First of all, I would not suggest buying one of Sigma's new lenses until the quality is more well known. Some are great right out of the box, but others have autofocus and reliability issues. Just read the reviews on this site for some of the Sigma lenses and check these sites out:


http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2008.09.12/the-sigma-saga


http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2009.05.17/lens-repair-data-30


The Canon 18-200 is the same price, and is 50mm shorter, but I would rather live with that than take a chance on the Sigma lottery.


Second, on the choice between a superzoom vs a 4X zoom, it really depends on what you value more: quality or convenience (changing lenses). Personally, I value quality much higher, so I don't use superzooms. But you should make the choice that is best for you.


Third, the 70-300 is a great lens for the price. There are other options, but they are not optimal:

• Canon EF-S 55-250mm. Less than half the price, but the quality is not as good as the 70-300. Comparison between 70-300 and 55-250.
• Canon EF 70-200mm f/4. A little more expensive, and does not have I.S. or the 300mm reach, but it's a stop faster and the quality is fantastic. Comparison between 70-300 @200 f/5.6 and 70-200 f/4 @ 200mm f/5.6. If you end up getting a 1.4X TC (more $$$), then you can compare them both at 300mm f/5.6 and see the "L" lens delivers higher quality. Of course, the image stabilizer is a big deal, and the 70-200 f/4 IS is a bit more spendy. I would encourage you to spring for it if you could. After all, if you're going to switch lenses, you might as well make it *really* worthwhile, right? []

Happy shooting with whatever you choose.