Customers Review Amazon Product

An excellent value lens for the press.
I gave this lens five stars on the basis that it' a very good budget lense. It provides good sharpness and a lot of benefits for this price range. A pro could use it if he doesn't brag about it. If you've got the bucks buy the Canon lenses. If not, this is a good package. There's something called a throwaway lens. It does the job, doesn't cost too much and if for some reason it disappears through theft, etc., it doesn't break the bank.

I bought this as a temporary replacement of a Canon lens, i.e. the 70-300mm DO. Ihad a confidence problem with that lens whciih lost sharpness without any good reason. I got the Sigma lens the day before leaving. I did some quick tests and it look okay. So I took it. Real time use proved it could fill a hole in my kit. The first day's images from the lens were checked on the laptop I travel with. They looked good. There are instances where the contrast is a bit week. I've dialed that up in the camera settings and it at least looks good in Canon DPP.

The build quality isn't as obviously good on the surface as Canon. It's more utilitarian in appearance. But form does follow function for the most part.

The front section of the lens rotates while focusing. if you use filters where orientation matters, you'll have do a workaround or do it in photoshop.

Switching to macro mode and back out of it is somewhat clumsy. Offsetting that is that there is a Macro which I find very useful.






.

Good lens for a tight budget
I've been very happy with this lens. The macro ability is very cool, the overall sharpness is very good, and auto focus is, while not as fast as some, is still pretty quick. I wish it had image stabilization, but for this price, that's a bit unrealistic. It get's quite long at the 300mm end (especially in the macro focus mode) so be prepared.

Compare and contrast vs Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L
I own both the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L and this Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO Macro for use on my Canon XTI. While it may not be fair to compare these lenses as the Canon is in a different price range, many potential buyers look for comparisons between the two.

In my experience, the Canon lens gives me better images overall. The Sigma gives me images better than the Canon when used in Macro mode on a tripod. The Canon focuses much faster in auto whereas the Sigma tends to hunt a bit. The Sigmas focusing ring is smooth but very stiff and reverse twists. A bit confusing at first when you are used to Canon lenses.

Macro mode annoys me because the switch locks itself. When it is on, the lens views only 200-300mm and the switch locks in the Macro position. I have to flip from manual to auto to manual to unlock the switch. While this may not bother many people, when I am shooting wildlife and it moves, I waste time switching over so that I can use a shorter focal length (below the locked 200m-300mm).

The quality of the Macro mode though "seems to" exceed that of the L lens for several reasons. Firstly, my L lens views 70-200mm and the Sigma views at 70-300mm. As I mentioned, the Macro is used from 200-300mm. When the L lens is used at 200mm I get a slight abberation and it takes a bit longer to focus in very bright or even slightly dim light. It also tends to underexpose, which I compensate for both in camera and post processing. The Sigma at 200mm isnt even breaking its stride, because it is not at max range. It doesnt get any color distortion yet and remains very crisp. But even in Macro it still tends to hunt a bit in auto. Therefore, the Sigma when used 70-200mm cant hold a candle to the Canon as far as color/tone, sharpness, bokeh, etc but shines when used 200-300mm in Macro.

As far as build quality, the Canon does beat the Sigma in my opinion. The Sigma has a texturized plastic housing which has a fine sandpaper like feel that irks me. It does help for grip but just feels weird. Other than that the zoom ring is very tight but the focus ring seems too loose. I do like that they kept the lens black rather than the gaudy offwhite of the Canon L lens which does not match the camera body or hood. Speaking of which, the Sigma does come with an okay hood and a very nice fitted nylon case. The Canon lens came with a very nice hood but a cheap cloth floppy drawstring bag.

Phew, okay after all that I have to say that its hard to compare these two lenses because its really like apples and oranges. Id say get the Canon if you plan to shoot using the whole range of 70 to 200mm. Get the Sigma if you want to use it for the Macro 200-300mm or because it is much more affordable. Good luck and happy shooting!

Sigma's great buy for the price
I was in need of a more powerful lense to compliment my 28-90mm lense when I found this. Though it was realitively inexspensive it surprised me in it's clarity /sharpness. Yes there is a bit of a halo at 300mm but not that bad. The auto focus isn't that great but is just ok. I use manual focus most the time anyway. All in all it is very good for most work and you can't beat the price. It is heavy enough to require a monopod for steadiness to aquire the sharpest shot. Good purchase if on a limited budget like myself.

Go for the Canon. This is cheap, cheap, cheap.
Based on the reviews here at Amazon I bought this lens. Within 5 minutes after it arrived it was out of the box and I was shooting, but I was extremely disappointed. It looks cheap and feels cheap. The zoom operation is stodgy and for the life of me I had a hard time getting nicely focused, hand-held pictures. I knew every time I used this lens I'd end up hating it, so I wrapped it back up and ordered the Canon. That arrived last night and there is absolutely no comparison. The IS USM version costs a little over 0, but it's worth it in my book.