Are Sigma lens any good for camera

[Black Forest]

I bought a Sigma lens for my Canon Rebel 300D. I am not at all happy with the pictures. The lens is a 28mm 200mm

So now I guess I will buy a Canon lens.

[macona]

They are hit and miss. Usually pretty good. This company in Hong Kong has some pretty amusing reviews:

[SGW]

28mm to 200mm is quite a wide range for a telephoto to cover. As an experiment, you might try taking a picture at 28mm, 100mm, and 200mm and seeing if one section of the range is significantly better or worse. I notice the reviews posted by Macona are both for fixed focal length lenses, which may tell you something about Sigma's fixed lenses but I'm not sure they necessarily tell you much about the variable focal length lenses.

But you will almost certainly solve the problem by buying a real Canon lens.

[Evan]

When buying lenses keep in mind that because of the sensor size of the 300D you need to multiply the given focal length by 1.6. So 28mm becomes 44mm or close to 50mm lens and 200 becomes 320mm. Because the sensor is only using 60% of the image area any image flaws are magnified.

The low end Canon lens aren't very good either. I have the 75-300 kit lens for the 300D and it is very soft focus. That is a polite way of saying that the sharpness sucks.

[MichaelP]

In general, fixed focus lenses will always be much better than those with a zoom range. Then those with a smaller range will be better that the ones with a wide range.

I stay with Canon lenses, many of them are "L" series. I still couldn't find a wide angle zoom lense I'd really like, but all of them are, definitely, better that any of the third party lenses.

By the way, I have a few very good Canon lenses in mint condition and original packaging I could sell, so if you're interested, contact me by e-mail.

[The Artful Bodger]

When buying lenses keep in mind that because of the sensor size of the 300D you need to multiply the given focal length by 1.6. So 28mm becomes 44mm or close to 50mm lens and 200 becomes 320mm. Because the sensor is only using 60% of the image area any image flaws are magnified.

But on the other hand it is the centre of the image that falls on the sensor so you are avoiding any degradation there might be towards the edges of the image.

[aostling]

I am not at all happy with the pictures.

The user reviews of the Canon lens on Amazon http://www.amazon.com/Canon-28-200mm...owViewpoints=1 are generally favorable, but seldom raves.

[Tony]

i've spent a lot of time and money after those lenses.. sigma, tamaron, etc.
buy used, name brand.. its the way to good. You won't regret it long term.

If you can find Tokina lenses in the range you like, usually the price to
performance is hard to beat.

Tony

[elf]

I bought a Sigma lens for my Canon Rebel 300D. I am not at all happy with the pictures. The lens is a 28mm 200mm

So now I guess I will buy a Canon lens.

Why aren't you happy with the pictures? What is your technique for taking the pictures? Do you use a tripod? Are you using flash? Can you post an image you're not happy with and share the aperture and shutter speed for it?

If I had a Canon, I'd start with the plastic 50mm f1.8 lens, then go from there.

[sch]

Sigma has a reasonably good rep for optics and cameras but all makers
have several series of lenses. A perusal at sites such as B&H photo
will show lenses covering roughly the same ranges at price points of
1x, 4x and 8x with x usually in the $150-250 range (suggested retail)
which reflect the general performance. Lower end lenses will have
softer focus, plastic construction and sourcing in China, Thailand etc
where the higher end tend to have larger apertures, metal construction
and Japanese sourcing. The f 4.5-5.6 ratings of many inexpensive zoom
lenses for cameras upto $1500 retail is compensated for by the very
sensitive CMOS detectors, compared with film era cameras. You will not
see the higher end lenses in the retail stores, you will have to seek out
specialty shops or digital shops such as B&H photo for these. OTOH
you have to consider whether it is the machine or the operator and
whether a $800 lense will really make that much difference over a $200
lense, sometimes it will, many times only til you blow up the pix to 16x20"
size will you see the difference. In camera processing is getting very
sophisticated and a deep understanding of the internal workings can
sometimes make astounding differences in results. Sites such as
DPReview give indepth reviews of cameras and lenses and a search there
might be helpful in evaluating both the lens you have and one you are
thinking about.