Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS or Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG OS Canon Mount (1 Viewer)

[Hor Kee]

:tear all,

I am considering purchasing good specimens of either one of these budget telephoto zooms to bridge the gap between my EF-S 18-55 kit lens and my EF400mm F5.6L prime telephoto. My camera body is an EOS 600D. My budget is rather limited after acquiring the camera body and the above telephoto.

I plan to use this in conjuction with my kit lens as a dual-lens setup for general photography, especially in places where my 400mm will be either too cumbersome, obvious or inflexible due to its fixed focal length and need for a tripod mount. I have been offered used examples of each of the above for good prices and in mint condition.

For now, I'm tempted to go with the Sigma as it can fit on my Kenko Pro 300 1.4x DGX teleconverter even if it is about 25% more expensive compared to the Canon. The Canon's rear flange precludes mounting it to the teleconverter, and I don't have any extension tubes to bridge the gap. Further, for some reason, using extension tubes will cause an EF-S lens to lost autofocus, which is a bit strange as I retain autofocus on my 400mm prime at F5.6. I found out this result with my above kit lens.

Does anyone have experience with both these lenses? Does their IS rule out use on tripod?

Thanks for the help guys :t:

 

[Jaff]

From everything I've heard the Canon lens is a little gem and a good cheapo alternative to the likes of the 70-200mm's for those with an APS-C body. Between the two you've listed it'd be my choice without a moments hesitation. Using that Sigma lens with a TC will not yield good results, very far from it.

And you can use any IS lens on a tripod. You can always turn the IS off when using such a lens on a tripod, although I leave mine on and it's never bothered me.

 

[jimthomson]

Don't rule out the Tamron 70-300mm VC USD.
Only the Canon 70-300mm L is better in this range and the Tamron is much less expensive.
I have both the 55-250mm and the Tamron and I'm shooting more with the Tamron now.
Nothing wrong with the 55-250mm just that theTamron is sharper has greater range and sort of works with a Kenko 1.4x converter.

 

[Hor Kee]

Don't rule out the Tamron 70-300mm VC USD.
Only the Canon 70-300mm L is better in this range and the Tamron is much less expensive.
I have both the 55-250mm and the Tamron and I'm shooting more with the Tamron now.
Nothing wrong with the 55-250mm just that theTamron is sharper has greater range and sort of works with a Kenko 1.4x converter.

Thanks Jim. Do you have any experience with the Tamron 18-270? I just found a mint used copy for sale, and wonder how it measures up to its 70-300 cousin?

 

[Huntso]

My daughter took this at full zoom with a Canon 55-250mm on a 550D which is essentially the same as your camera. Was my lens originally, bought it as a stopgap from a friend and ended up keeping it for ages. Only sold it when a 70-200mm f/4 IS came up at a good price, excellent lens and lightweight too which is a bonus

 

[jimthomson]

Thanks Jim. Do you have any experience with the Tamron 18-270? I just found a mint used copy for sale, and wonder how it measures up to its 70-300 cousin?

Sorry I've never tried the superzooms.

 

[Jaff]

Thanks Jim. Do you have any experience with the Tamron 18-270? I just found a mint used copy for sale, and wonder how it measures up to its 70-300 cousin?

They're aimed at people who want a 'one lens does all' job for taking on holidays, family snapshots and the like but if you're serious about your images then I would recommend you steer clear of the ultra range zooms. They are built with too many compromises in them to accommodate such a wide focal length range and the result is poor IQ, especially at the wide and long ends (the ones people use most!). Far better to keep your 18-55mm and find another lens to compliment it like the Tamron 70-300mm Jim mentioned. Traditionally Tamron do a good job of making lenses with great IQ and is almost certainly going to be superior to the Sigma equivalent. If you can find one of those within your budget I think that would be the one for you.

 

[Hor Kee]

Thanks for the feedback. Looks like the Canon is the one to go for me

 

[eastwood]

They're aimed at people who want a 'one lens does all' job.

:t:
I have the non PZD (ie older version) of 18-270. Qualitywise, it is not bad, don't know how it compares with the Canon as I have not used the latter. But the price of Canon should beat the tammy.

 

[Macswede]

I think the Canon 55-250 is a great lens for the money especially as it has IS. I borrow my wife's for trips when the 100-400 isn't a practical option.