EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

[nativetxn73]

Hi.  I am considering purchasing either the Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM lens or the Sigma 50-500mm F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM lens.  

I'm looking for anyone that can tell me more about either of these lenses & their own personal experience with them.

[RobKillen]

Hi Cicopo.

The Sigma 50-500mm is appealing to me a generic walkabout lens. This is because I walk around twons and cities and then often find myself with a need to reach into more distant objects (recent trip to Florence proved the point). My current lenses run 17-35, 100mm, 70-200 and 150-600mm but I feel the Sigma might just cover all of my options.

Is the lens reasonably portable? Is a tripod mandatory for its use?

Thanks.

Regards,

Rob.

[ebiggs1]

I have the Sigma 150-500mm which is an older version of the newer 50-500mm Siggy.

"Is the lens reasonably portable?"       No, it is not.  It is big.  Remember it has a 10:1 zoom ratio. So it is going to be big and its IQ is a understandable compromise. Is a tripod mandatory for its use?

Is a tripod mandatory for its use?        As can be expected for a lens with a 450-500mm focal length available.  Yes I know it is designated 500mm, but that focal length seems overstated to me. 450-470mm or so looks about right.  The Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX DG HSM Lens is not small or light. It has even acquired a nickname - "Bigma".  You can carry this lens all day.  You will know you did.  It is not too heavy to handhold, but a support would be welcome if you intend to have it in shooting position for long periods of time.

I believe the SIgma "Bigma" has been discontinued .  You will have to find one or get a used one.  Why not check out the new Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens.     It is head and shoulders better.

[RobKillen]

Thank you, E Biggs, for your detailed response. It's very useful.

Currently I have a 16-35, 100, 70-200 and a 150-600. What I'm looking for is something that's reasonably wide but also has the 40-70 range and then out to say 350-400 - which I can use as a general purpose lens. Weight isn't an issue for me and I have an excellent tripod as well as a modets monopod.

You can still get the 50-500mm here in the UK, new and it's heavily discounted - down to around £500.00 now.

When out roaming, I want to cut down lens changes in poor weather, sandy beach areas and spontaneous hikes, walks and tours.

Any further advice or insight would be much appreciated.

Regards, thanks.

Rob.

[ebiggs1]

Rob,

Again remember I have the 150-500mm version.  But like I said the two lenses are nearly identical except for the extra 100mm on the short end.  Mine is also the brand-N mount.  the one you want is the Sigma 50-500mm f/4.5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM Lens model.

Sigma made two models one has OS and one doesn't.  You will need the OS which is Sigma version of image stabilization.  Actually it works very well.  I have a photo from my normal set up for shooting birds. Unfortunately there wasn't any birds around at the time.  It will give you an idea of what you can expect from yours.  This is from a 12mp camera on a tripod.

I wouldn't consider it as, my, general walk around lens but I suppose it will certainly work.  It is not weather proof at all.

IMHO, it is a very good lens especially for the money.  However, it is not a great lens. I have had two of them. One in each mount.  I didn't keep the Canon mount because I have more better Canon lenses.  I have the Nikkor 200-500mm lens and the Siggy is way better than Nikon's entry in this catagory.  I would pick the Siggy every time over the Nikkor.

[RobKillen]

Hi EBiggs1.

Thanks, again, for the great response - it is much appreciated.

Currently doing the rounds and having something a negoti-auction with a few suppliers - we'll see what happens.

That picture is useful too - the idea that I can get along the Jurassic coast here, take in some landscapes and then close in on formations, birds, ships and whatever in the region, is highly attractive.

Again, thank you.

Regards

Rob.

[cicopo]

I had the original 50-500 (non OS version) and it was a pretty good lens but not for hand holding when used in the longer end. it gewts heavy rather quickly. IQ was good but AF was a bit slow for fast paced action, which became what I shoot most of the time these days. It was fine for wildlife but I doubt it would be very good for birds in flight untess they are large.

[teammt]

i had the same question. After some very helpfull posts from other fourm members I went with the 24-105L and the 100-400L. This works best as the walk around lens is lighter. I have recently added the the 11 - 24 f4.