Lenses canon v sigma

[SCraig]

I've already got what I want and I don't shoot Canon.

 

[equivocalchick]

The closest sigma I've got to that is the 70-300, and I can say it worked wonderfully when I used it in Africa. I always use full manual, so I can't tell you how well the auto focus works, other than it seems slow and noisy to me (they all do though, lol).

What I have learned with Sigma, is it can kind of be hit or miss. Some lenses are great, but they seem to have a 'good copy' vs 'bad copy' issue. I've had a few good copies, but I've also had a few bad copies with various sigma lenses. I'm usually broke (and I tend to destroy my equipment anyways) so I just take the risk and go with the cheaper option, hoping it works out. I'd say with sigma 70% of the time it does (if I always bought new instead of used I'd raise that to 80%).

But if you can afford canon, absolutely go for that first. You'll know you're getting consistent quality and a reliable, durable lens. I've found that even though my Sigmas feel super solid and have a nicer feel and look to them than the canons, and often better deals with focal lengths, they just don't really seem to survive as long, and the 'bad copy' factor always adds some level of risk.