comparison sigma 18-200 OS vs Canon 17-85 IS ? I have a rebel XTi and want to upgrade from kit lens. I am seriously torn between these two lenses. Anybody compare the 2 regarding IQ?
1298394
These are very different lenses; if you want an "upgrade" to your kit lens, the 17-85 has a similar range; while the sigma is a wide-to-tele zoom lens;In my opinion, the best "upgrade" to the kit lens is the 17-55 lens that Canon makes.
1298395
realize that the full frame camera like the 5D is in the $2000 price range, probably caters to a very serious photographer who probably wouldn't buy lenses at this price point anyway. This lens mates well with the typical market segment for the EOS 350D, 400D or 450D.
1298396
The key thing to consider are the intital costs of the lenses. Secondly then know that the sigma CANNOT be used with a full frame camera (ex. 5D, etc) while the canon CAN be used. So if you are thinking about upgrading to a full frame camera, then get the canon. But if are going to stay with APC type sensor, then the sigma is much cheaper.
1646078
Both lenses are excellent and brilliantly sharp. The Sigma is less expensive. The Canon focuses more quickly, a little, no macro lenses are fast. It should come down to what focal length you want. Canon offers an IS version of the macro. The stabilization is nice if you hand hold, but doubles the price and weight.
1192969
Initially, I was also thinking of purchasing XSi earlier but now zeroed in on T1i (or 50D - wallet permitting) because (1) higher Effective Pixels in T1i / 50D - 15.1 M as against 12.2 M. ( I agree not a big factor for casual / normal photography) (2) HD Video in T1i (though one of my last considerations , but still it's a cool feature to have - managing a DSLR & Camcorder during an event / ceremony is difficult for me ) (3) DIGIC 4 Image Processing engine in T1i / 50D is better than Digic III in XSi (4) Lower ISO Rating / range in case of XSi (100-1600) as compared to T1i / 50D (100-3200 expandable to 6400,12800) meaning better performance in low light for T1i / 50D. (5) Number of LCD dots (in the LCD screen) is much higher in T1i / 50D (920,000) as against XSi (230,000) meaning better LCD visibility in bright sunlight. (6) Last but not the least , XSi was launched in January'08 as against March'09 for T1i - so you have already lost ~1.5 years out of 5 year life!! However , in case of Pixel density and price XSi scores over T1i/50D. Btw, cost difference is not much for T1i with and without the kit lens - better go for T1i kit. Canon 28-135mm zoom lens is ok but I like Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD Aspherical IF Macro Zoom Lens. Hope this will be helpful for you.
1947495
The biggest difference is that this lens is weather sealed, while the Sigma 70-300mm is not. Its range also meshes well with the stock 18-55mm kit lens. Regarding IQ, the only head to head test I found seemed to indicate IQ was similar except at the far end (270-300mm) where the Pentax had slightly better IQ. But the two lenses are close enough that if I hadn't valued the weather sealing I probably would have gotten the Sigma at half the price -- the reality is that neither is a professional grade lens and neither will give you professional-grade IQ at 300mm.
1820411
I have a question along these lines. The two big criticisms of this lens tend to be the construction and the focus noise. Many people with these criticisms seem to tend to own $800 lenses, so I don't know what these are in comparison to.How do the focus noise and construction compare to the XSi kit lens - the 18-55 IS 3.5-5.6 lens? As far as I can tell that lens is made of plastic and it isn't USM, but I wouldn't consider it slow at focus or loud or poor construction, but I can see how it could be better. Is the 50mm 1.8 lens comparable to the 18-55 IS, or is it of inferior quality? I have a question along these lines. The two big criticisms of this lens tend to be the construction and the focus noise. Many people with these criticisms seem to tend to own $800 lenses, so I don't know what these are in comparison to.How do the focus noise and construction compare to the XSi kit lens - the 18-55 IS 3.5-5.6 lens? As far as I can tell that lens is made of plastic and it isn't USM, but I wouldn't consider it slow at focus or loud or poor construction, but I can see how it could be better. Is the 50mm 1.8 lens comparable to the 18-55 IS, or is it of inferior... » Read More I have a question along these lines. The two big criticisms of this lens tend to be the construction and the focus noise. Many people with these criticisms seem to tend to own $800 lenses, so I don't know what these are in comparison to.How do the focus noise and construction compare to the XSi kit lens - the 18-55 IS 3.5-5.6 lens? As far as I can tell that lens is made of plastic and it isn't USM, but I wouldn't consider it slow at focus or loud or poor construction, but I can see how it could be better. Is the 50mm 1.8 lens comparable to the 18-55 IS, or is it of inferior quality? « Show Less
307513
Right now you can get the XSi with the 18-55mm kit lens and the 55-250mm lens for just under $800 through Amazon. Both lenses are image stabilized and I have heard good things about the 55-250, which give great range on a cropped sensored body such as the XSi. Amazon doesn't list these items together but if you add them both to your cart (make sure Amazon is the seller on both) you will save $100 over buying them seperately. This price isn't shown until you get the order confirmation screen. This is the best price I have seen on this camera and don't expect to see a much better deal any time soon. The $100 off is an instant rebate promotion that Canon is offering through it's authorized retailers and it lasts until the middle of January. I would also recommend SanDisk's Extreme III class 6 memory cards in order to fully optimize the speed of the camera. I hope this helps.
597329
Sounds good! I'm buying my first digital camera for my daughter and her family. I've locked in on the t1i and 15-85. I really like my 24-105 lens and think that the 15-85 should be a great match for the camera.
1820412
The 1.8 is similar in build quality to the kit lens--probably a slight bit below the XSI kit. If you're happy with the kit lens, you should be happy with the 1.8.There's a reason why 93% of the reviews here are 4 or 5 stars--this lens takes great pictures. For $80, what do you have to lose?
387101
This is a matter of personal choice, and finances....the Canon lens is about twice the price of the Sigma. You gain a stop of light. I use this lens for portraits, and get spectacular results. The bokeh is beautiful. However, at 1.4, it is entirely possible to lose focus on the subject's back eye. I did use it for an event, too....and opened it all the way up....beautiful shots.
699880
Ah, the Rebel XT -- I had one of those for a while. Small LCD screen did make it a bit hard to check if something was in focus or not. The Canon 100-300mm USM isn't a bad lens. But you might consider upgrading the 28-80mm USM -- even the newer kit lens, the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, is an improvement. You might also enjoy working with a fast prime lens for the background blurring it can provide. Something like the the Canon 50mm f1.8 or 50mm f1.4 or 85mm f1.8 are excellent lenses. Cool images, by the way!
1046019
The link for the comparison at cameralabs.com is not applicable because it tested the Sigma 18-200 DC prior to the release of the OS version. The OS version is much better optically than its predecessor and also includes HSM (High Speed Motor). I have read test reviews and comparisons at other sites such as popphoto that indicate the Sigma is sharper and has less distortion than the Nikon 18-200 VR, but they also state it is slightly louder. I just received my Sigma 18-200 OS today and have done limited testing, but I can tell you the AF and OS noise are not bad (the OS chirps when it turns on and off). The Sigma AF is louder than my Nikon 18-135 (w/SWM), but quieter than the AF on my Nikon 50mm 1.8 prime (wo/SWM). The HSM AF seems just as fast as my Nikon lenses. The build quality feels better than the Nikon 18-135; the zoom is smooth and solid. The first things I tested today were barrel distortion and OS functionality. Barrel distortion is present at the wide end on ALL wide-range zooms, but the Sigma controls it better. The Sigma has noticeably less barrel distortion at 18mm than my Nikon. This benefit of the Sigma is moot really, because barrel distortion of both lenses can easily be corrected with software. The OS functions very well, I can shoot hand-held down to 1/10th of a second with no blur. I will post again after I have time to do more testing.
1352096
I have the Rebel XTI and I've taken some great close up pictures with the Canon 100mm f2.8 macro. I also have the 70-200mm f/4, 17-55mm f2.8, 85mm f1.8 and the 17-40 f/4, but my favorite is the 100mm macro with the 70-200mm f/4 a very close second.
488638
I'm trying to decide whether to go with either the 800IS, 850IS, or the Sony DSC-T100. I guess pic quality is the most important, and I usually trust Canon images above all others in this class....but I really love the size and design of the Sony, especially the sliding lens cover which powers it up. Anyone have an opinion?
760811
Hi xynobis. Both those lenses are excellent. The 17-55 likes to flare when a light source is in the frame, so a hood is a must. Other than that, they both have great AF, IS and produce equally awesome pictures. So I think it's a matter of what you'll be using it for. The 15-85 is ideally suited for sightseeing, and outdoors. It's usually bright outside, so a narrower aperture is fine and this lens is much more civilized when it comes to flare. It also has more reach, and a little more breadth. The 17-55 is much better for indoor/event and evening shooting. I love having both, but I only ever use one at a time, depending on where/what I'm shooting. If I could only have one, it would be the 15-85. I find I can never have enough focal length, and I'm willing to up my ISO a stop or two to get the shutter speed I need.
537013
TVM,Thanks for the heads-up on the Sigma. A popular photo mag just this month had a review on a Sigma lens - 18mm/250mm. They gave it a big thumbs up so I'll keep checking up on Sigma for quality and suitability/cost-effectiveness for the T1i. I'll already start some reading up on the 150mm/500mm. BTW - that "500" # sounds juicy. Per Tech's comment (and I educated myself more on what he was talking about) what with a 1.4 or 1.6 mag ratio that 500mm max zoom should be more like in the 700's. I guess that means a quality tripod (read "triple digits") is in the cards too. TVM,Thanks for the heads-up on the Sigma. A popular photo mag just this month had a review on a Sigma lens - 18mm/250mm. They gave it a big thumbs up so I'll keep checking up on Sigma for quality and suitability/cost-effectiveness for the T1i. I'll already start some reading up on the 150mm/500mm. BTW - that "500" # sounds juicy. Per Tech's comment (and I educated myself more on what he was talking about) what with a 1.4 or 1.6 mag ratio that 500mm max zoom should be more like in the 700's. I guess that means a quality tripod (read "triple digits") is in the... » Read More TVM,Thanks for the heads-up on the Sigma. A popular photo mag just this month had a review on a Sigma lens - 18mm/250mm. They gave it a big thumbs up so I'll keep checking up on Sigma for quality and suitability/cost-effectiveness for the T1i. I'll already start some reading up on the 150mm/500mm. BTW - that "500" # sounds juicy. Per Tech's comment (and I educated myself more on what he was talking about) what with a 1.4 or 1.6 mag ratio that 500mm max zoom should be more like in the 700's. I guess that means a quality tripod (read "triple digits") is in the cards too. « Show Less
2133893
I bought the Canon 10-22mm because it was a little bit faster (3.5/4.5 vs 4.0/5.6) and gave me a little more range on the zoom. I tend to trust Canon glass over Sigma personally especially with the technical components. I've shot on the Sigma and the Canon and as far as picture quality goes, I give the edge to the Canon lens.
1787338
Any thoughts for general / home photography? I have a Digital Rebel XSI and recently bought the 70-200 mm F2.8 IS version mainly to photograph school events without the annoying flash, and take closeups of my rapidly-growing kids. I have been going back and forth between the two lenses (24-70 F2.8 vs. 24-105 F4.0 IS) but my instinct is that F2.8 is much better than F 4 even with IS. Any guidance appreciated from a professional.