Sigma Lens

[ketan]

Hi,
I am planning to buy a Sigma 28-300 "DG Macro" lens for may 30D.
Can someone tell me that what does DG Macro means ? Does it have functions of macro lens ?
Thanks
ketan

 

[Garbz]

It comes close. It has a 1:3 Reproduction ratio very characteristic of these zooming "macro" lenses. The image is only 1/3rd as close as what some would call a true macro lens which has a 1:1 magnification, is often optimised for this near focus distance, and usual a prime (fixed focus) lens.

 

[britonk]

DG means that the lens is suitable for use with full frame cameras (or 35mm film cameras). The sensor in most digital SLRs is smaller than the space usually used on a role of film and some lenses take advantage of this but this means you can't use them on "full frame cameras".

 

[DSLR noob]

a 28-300 does not sounds like very good image quality to me.

 

[ANDS!]

Fred Miranda

Photography Review

For the cost to utility, seems like a good little lens. I've used Sigma lenses before - not bad.

 

[keith204]

A guy at work has both the 28-300 and the 28-200 (maybe 18-200) anyway, both sigmas. He said the 28-300 is awful compared to the other one. Terrible autofocusing, terrible quality. Image quality is suppossed to be OK, but the autofocus probably won't last long. His did, but has problems. Google that lens, and you'll find all kinds of people complaining that the autofocus goes out.

However, I think you can get a 6 year warranty with that lens (?). In this case, who cares how much it breaks? worst case, you'll be stuck without a lens for a couple months. (something to consider)

What's your budget?

Anyway, to sum it up... if you don't need the 300, you might want to look into a 18-200 or 28-200. I own 2 very nice Sigma lenses, and am impressed...but can't necessarily say the 28-300 will have the same build quality.

 

[DSLR noob]

A guy at work has both the 28-300 and the 28-200 (maybe 18-200) anyway, both sigmas. He said the 28-300 is awful compared to the other one. Terrible autofocusing, terrible quality. Image quality is suppossed to be OK, but the autofocus probably won't last long. His did, but has problems. Google that lens, and you'll find all kinds of people complaining that the autofocus goes out.

However, I think you can get a 6 year warranty with that lens (?). In this case, who cares how much it breaks? worst case, you'll be stuck without a lens for a couple months. (something to consider)

What's your budget?

Anyway, to sum it up... if you don't need the 300, you might want to look into a 18-200 or 28-200. I own 2 very nice Sigma lenses, and am impressed...but can't necessarily say the 28-300 will have the same build quality.

A canon EOS camera can autofocus with a lens that has a max aperture of 5.6 or less(1-series, up to f/8), in the telephoto end of this lens it is a f/6.3, the autofocus doesn't "go out" it isn't functional because it isn't designed to be. I wouldn't get a lens this consumer level, quality, function, and build would be horrible.

 

[bjrouse]

You couldn't give me a Sigma 28-300.
Save your money, wait and buy a decent zoom lens

 

[EOS_JD]

A canon EOS camera can autofocus with a lens that has a max aperture of 5.6 or less(1-series, up to f/8), in the telephoto end of this lens it is a f/6.3, the autofocus doesn't "go out" it isn't functional because it isn't designed to be. I wouldn't get a lens this consumer level, quality, function, and build would be horrible.

The AF will still work because it goes with ethe lens' maximum aperture (focal length does not come into it for AF). The max aperture of f3.5 is therefore greater than the 5.6 and AF will work......however

The main thing is that at f6.3 the AF will not be great because the lens needs a lot of light to function properly. Most consumer zooms struggle in lower light. f6.3 is very slow and to be honest you would certainly be better with a faster lens.

 

[EOS_JD]

Terrible autofocusing, terrible quality. Image quality is suppossed to be OK, but the autofocus probably won't last long. His did, but has problems. Google that lens, and you'll find all kinds of people complaining that the autofocus goes out.

However, I think you can get a 6 year warranty with that lens (?). In this case, who cares how much it breaks? worst case, you'll be stuck without a lens for a couple months. (something to consider)

It's not that the AF will break or go out, it's just a function of focusing with a lens with a narrow f6.3 apperture.

 

[ketan]

Thanks Guys, I have almost made up my mind to stick to 28-200.
Now I have one Tamron 28-200 AF Aspherical XR (IF) AO3 that I was using with EOS300 (Film camera).
Should I mount that on my 30D or I should go for 28-200 Sigma 'meant' for digital camera ?

 

[EOS_JD]

Use the one you have. You'll find them both similar. Save up and buy a faster lens that you'll be able to use in more situations.....

 

[DSLR noob]

The AF will still work because it goes with ethe lens' maximum aperture (focal length does not come into it for AF). The max aperture of f3.5 is therefore greater than the 5.6 and AF will work......however

The main thing is that at f6.3 the AF will not be great because the lens needs a lot of light to function properly. Most consumer zooms struggle in lower light. f6.3 is very slow and to be honest you would certainly be better with a faster lens.

I never said it had anything to do with focal length, and I know AF speeds up when opened up more, I'm saying if you zoom into 300mm and the max aperture is a measly 6.3, the autofocus won't just suck, it just plain won't work.

 

[carusoswi]

a 28-300 does not sounds like very good image quality to me.

It doesn't have to make bad images. You need to respect its limitations, however. I have that lense (or some version of it, purchased it three years ago - it's non macro, and what I read about this lens says that the macro is much improved in terms of imaging). If I shoot fully extended to 300 mm, it produces vignetting. Of course, when I shoot at that magnification level, I am mostly interested in what I'm trying to catch, usually in the middle of the frame. At slightly less magnification, the vignetting effect falls off appreciably. Either way, in most cases, I can correct that fault using Photoshop.

If you shoot using exposure combinations that don't force the lense to be at its widest aperture, you also improve its imaging (well, you avoid some of its weaknesses - true for any lense).

Given a choice of being able to take advantage of the wide range this lense (or others similar) offer or doing without (either because of budget constraints or inconvenience in carrying more than two or more better quality lenses to cover the same range, I'll take the wide range lens everyday and be mindful of its limitations.

BTW, I have two of these wide range lenses - for two different film bodies. One a Tamaron 28-200 mm, and the Sigma 28-300 mm. The Tamaron feels better when I use it, I like the design better, but, given the range difference, it's probably not fair to compare their image quality

Just a thought.

Caruso

 

[EOS_JD]

I never said it had anything to do with focal length, and I know AF speeds up when opened up more, I'm saying if you zoom into 300mm and the max aperture is a measly 6.3, the autofocus won't just suck, it just plain won't work.

You have contradicted yourself.

You say you didn't mention focal length then say at 300mm AF won't work???!!

I can assure you that at 300mm f6.3 the AF will still work - might not be great but the AF will certainly still work because the maximum aperture of the lens is still f3.5. The fact it's f6.3 at 300mm does not mean anything. It gpoes with the lens' max aperture and does not mean the max aperture at a certain focal length.