Sigma 70-300 APO DG

[PoohJen]

Okay....I've narrowed my zoom search to this lens. It seems the next best thing is the much-backordered canon 70-300 IS, which costs over $400 more. -and until I know what f/4-5.6 means, I have no business spending that kind of $$!

So...anyone care to encourage/dissuade me?? (I'm so impressionable! ) Anyone used this for sports, inparticular (kids sports, not the World Cup)

Best price I found was at Cameta Camera, an eBay shop based on Long Island. It doesn't take PayPal, but gets good ratings on resellerratings.com.

TIA!

 

[Sonno]

Okay....I've narrowed my zoom search to this lens. It seems the next best thing is the much-backordered canon 70-300 IS, which costs over $400 more. -and until I know what f/4-5.6 means, I have no business spending that kind of $$!

So...anyone care to encourage/dissuade me?? (I'm so impressionable! ) Anyone used this for sports, inparticular (kids sports, not the World Cup)

Best price I found was at Cameta Camera, an eBay shop based on Long Island. It doesn't take PayPal, but gets good ratings on resellerratings.com.

TIA!

The f/4-5.6 means that, for this lens, it has a max aperture of f/4 @ 70mm and f/5.6 @ 300mm.

As for the lens, you might be better off with the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 or the Canon equivalent. If you're using an APS-C, the focal length translates to 112-320mm

Here's the test results and review:
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_70300_456/index.htm

 

[0bli0]

make sure you are getting the APO version of this lens. it's much better than the 28-300 they make. obviously the Canon IS version gives you image stabilisation, but you have to decide whether that's worth it for you.

the f/4-5.6 means the lens aperture is maximum F4 @ 75 mm and F5.6 @ 300mm

 

[Kelly Grannell]

I personally like the Sigma APO version better than the Canon 70-300 IS. Now here comes the big but(t): it's better if you compare them both mounted on a tripod. I sold my Sigma APO in favour of the 70-300 IS due to the IS. No more tripod required in most of my applications.

 

[Charade]

too bad you're not in the market for the Nikon version. I have one that I'm not using anymore since I got my 18-200 VR.

 

[spoon2003]

It seems the next best thing is the much-backordered canon 70-300 IS

According to B&H site, stock is expected in August.

I'm a hand held photographer, so saving my pennies for IS.

Sue

 

[geetey]

Can't help with the lens but I did want to let you know that I have used Cameta Camera. They were very good to work with.

 

[PoohJen]

Thanks for the feedback! and for the less re: aperture. Why is it that aperature ability is reduced the further out you zoom? and this is important b/c it means less light comes thru? Can you correct with ISO or shutter speed?

 

[Kelly Grannell]

it's just cheaper to make it that way. To get a constant aperture, the lens will be much higher in price because it's far more difficult to be done.

If the max aperture is f/5.6, you can't 'fix' it with ISO or shutter speed. You can change it to smaller aperture such as f/8 or f/10 or f/12, but nothing larger than the max aperture.

 

[PoohJen]

it's just cheaper to make it that way. To get a constant aperture, the lens will be much higher in price because it's far more difficult to be done.

If the max aperture is f/5.6, you can't 'fix' it with ISO or shutter speed. You can change it to smaller aperture such as f/8 or f/10 or f/12, but nothing larger than the max aperture.

Oh, I meant can you compensate for the smaller apperture (light issue) with, for instance, a slower shutter speed?

 

[0bli0]

you can compensate for the exposure, but not the DOF, bokeh, etc. also, there are physical limitations with teleconverters and AF.

generally speaking, internal zoom lenses are usually constant aperture and telescoping zooms are variable aperture (look through the lens as you zoom out and you'll see the decreased amount of light. there are some noticable exceptions, such as the 24-70 2.8L, which do change in length but remain constant.

 

[jann1033]

Oh, I meant can you compensate for the smaller apperture (light issue) with, for instance, a slower shutter speed?

could be my stupidity( wouldn't be the first time) but that 's why i got the 50mmf1.8 canon lens...everything i have/ going to get is basically the same f4ish/5 and i wanted something for lower light ( and for around $70 the price is right)

and for me, the longer the zoom the more you see my earthquake shake so a slower shtter speed isn't an option ( for me)unless i am using a tripod( or my soon to be made handy dandy bean bag camera support ) your usage may vary

 

[mhutchinson]

it's just cheaper to make it that way.

Not to mention that the lens will also be lighter and more compact. The 70-300mm IS (when retracted) is smaller in size than even the smaller 70-200mm f/4 L. Don't forget that the slower the glass, the more likely you will have to manually focus.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

The above link has some pics of the lenses next to each other.

Mike