Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 2, 2009, 12:04 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Mauritius
Posts: 27
Default

Hi,

I'm in the market for a new 70-300mm lens for my eos 450d.

I wanted to buy Canon 75-300 but was warned buy people on the forum that it doesn't match the quality of the Sigma or Tamron.

The Sigma looks like a good quality lens but the thing is I can get the Tamron for much cheaper.

So will I regret it if I buy the cheaper Tamron?
Has anyone seen photo's taken with the Sigma and Tamron, how do they compare?

Thanks in advance

Avatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 2, 2009, 4:54 AM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Mauritius
Posts: 27
Default

I've done some reading and it seems like the Tamron might have the edge in image quality and that the auto focus speed is not as big of a problem as people say.

So why is the tamron so much cheaper?

Think I just might go with the Tamron if there is no obvious reason to get the Sigma.
Avatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2009, 10:31 AM   #3
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

My guess is you're paying for the Sigma name. Both of these are budget zooms, so you can't expect a whole lot for a 300mm lens that costs < $200. As for AF speed it really depends on what you are planning to photograph. AF speed is a relative thing. Someone that has never used a fast focusing lens has no basis to compare how fast/slow these lenses focus. If you're buying the lens for just 'more reach' for casual shots than AF speed won't matter. If your goal is to shoot sports or moving wildlife (as opposed to perched birds) the lack of AF speed compared to better lenses will be a factor. But the Sigam version does NOT have HSM so both lenses will be slow to focus (as compared to a Sigma HSM lens or a Canon ring USM focus lens).
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2009, 12:42 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Mauritius
Posts: 27
Default

Thanks John,

I will use the lens for birds and wild life primarily but also for the occasional sport photo's.

The Tamron is almost ZAR800 (+-$80) cheaper than the sigma and canon and, from what I've read, has the better image quality. At this moment I don't think I will benefit significantly from the USM lenses for the type of photo's I'm going to take.

Durability wise is the Tamron up to standard with the canon and sigma?
Avatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2009, 12:48 PM   #5
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

I can't speak to it's durability as I've never held it. Again though it's a budget zoom lens so you're not going to get healthy build quality like the Canon 70-300 IS USM much less the sigma EX and canon Ls (which are metal instead of plastic).

I will say depending on the wildlife work you plan on doing you may find 300mm too short. I'm not trying to discourage you at all - just want to set your expectations. For birds in flight and shooting small birds at rest you will find 300mm not long enough. For things like deer and squirel in the back yard it will be fine. But for small birds or BIF 400 and 500mm can be limiting.

Again, everyone has a budget - I completely understand. It's just better to have an understanding of llimitations before you buy it.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2009, 1:08 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Mauritius
Posts: 27
Default

Thanks for the replies John,

that's why I come to the experts on this site for the best advice :-)

At the moment I just have the kit lens that came with my camera and this is a bit limiting. My budget is not to strict between the Canon 75-300 USM, Sigma 70-300 and Tamron 70-300 and I will use any good advice to make a choice.

The cheaper lenses in SA are quite expensive comparing it to the US prices maybe I should not scratch this itch right now and try looking to buy a new or second hand lens from over seas...

Choices, choices.
Avatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2009, 1:31 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Cyberf828's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 659
Default

I had the Canon 70-300mm lens and it was nice I never had any problems with IQ quality. I did find that 300mm was not enough reach for wildlife shots unless I sat in the woods and waited for it to come to me like hunting LOL.
Cyberf828 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2009, 8:03 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 185
Default

have you looked at the tamron 28-300 . i got it ,really nice.
camerageak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2009, 11:23 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
a-beginner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 197
Default

Would also suggest the 28-300 Tamron. The latest version of this lens has VC, the equivalent of Canon's IS.

I have this lens also and am very happy with it.

You may want to check out photos of someone else who has this lens at this site:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisof...7605021024366/
a-beginner is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:07 AM.