03-16-2018 09:07 AM
The increase in image quality along with the wider aperture at the telephoto end are the big advantages of the Canon over the Sigma and to me would be more important than the increase in focal length although that is also useful. I believe the Sigma is also only designed for "crop sensor" cameras while the Canon would work also work with full frame if you move that direction in the future.
In general the wider the "zoom" range the more expensive it becomes to provide good image quality so you have to consider the convenience/cost/quality tradeoff.
Sigma makes some good stuff and some of their products have no direct Canon counterpart but from an image quality standpoint the 18-250 isn't one of their best efforts and I think you will see a noticeable improvement with the Canon, especially at wide aperture openings.
03-16-2018 09:41 AM
Personally I would not own any of them. There are three 70-300mm's you know? However, still wanting this type lens I wouild go Canon all the way. The 'white' "L" version being the best by far.
This is a pretty darn good lens if you want this focal range. Sell the Sigma!
03-16-2018 05:44 PM
The new canon 70-300 II has gotten good reviews and would be a good purchase, but it is probably as big and heavy as the Sigma. Assuming you have an APS-C camera that can take EF-S lenses, the 55-250 might be better since it is much smaller and lighter than the 70-300.
(You can compare the FOV here:
04-06-2018 01:01 PM
I use the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM which has a middle of the range price and is a recent design. I like it, but the "Lens Information Display shows focusing distance, focal length and shake amount" seems cool, but is not super practical since you can't look at the lens display while you're looking through the viewfinder. But when I put it on a tripod for landscape picture, I can take a look at the shake amount in case I am worried that there is wind that causes some shake.
The autofocus is quiet, so if you plan to shoot videos, it may appeal to you.