canons

EF 70-210mm 1:3.5-4.5
35-80mm Kit lense 1:4-5.6
18-55 kit lense 1:3.5-5.6
28mm 1:2.8
50mm 1:1.8

I have a Sigma 70-300mm DG Telephoto Macro lens.

For the price I cant really fault it. Sometimes it seems a little soft, but then thats probably me being rubbish. My entry for this months photo comp was taken using it, as well as the two photos of sand lizards on my website...

if youre in the market for a consumer grade telephoto then the Sigma APO 70-300 and the Tamron Di-II 70-300 are hard to beat price/performance wise.

The sigma is more expensive but (apparently) has slightly better CA control. I would rank them in this order

Sigma 70-300 < Tamron Di-II < Sigma 70-300 APO


If its not otherwise mentioned, the Sigma APO lenses have a red stripe running round near the front of the lens.

Dont confuse the Sigma 70-300 with the Sigma 100-300 F5.6-6.7, which is cheap and nasty and to be avoided, or the Sigma EX 100-300 F4, which is a seriously nice piece of glass but with a matching price tag.

I know I could google it, but in simple terms, whats the difference between DG and APO and all the likes?

. Like what does "L" stand for for canon lenses, all I know is it means "Expensive" (and presumably good too)

What is a Canon L-series lens and why is it a big deal?

    Canon sell a number of lenses in a special series they refer to as L for “luxury.” These are their most expensive and highest-quality lenses, and are readily identifiable by the red stripe painted around the end of the barrel.

    L series lenses offer higher optical quality than their non-L equivalents, and have an important technical aspect in common. At least one element in every L lens is either made of fluorite crystal rather than glass, is a ground aspheric lens element (not a moulded/replicated aspheric lens as used in less expensive lenses) or is made from ultra-low dispersion glass. Most L series lenses are also sturdily built - many are encased in metal barrels and are weatherproofed - and most are very fast lenses for their focal lengths. Nearly all telephoto L series lenses are also off-white rather than black.

    These lenses are, therefore, marketed as professional camera lenses and are usually priced out of the range of most consumers. They can be used to take great photographs, but the cost, weight and size of these lenses are the tradeoffs.

    Of course, a lens doesn’t have to be an L series lens to take good pictures. Many EOS lenses offer excellent optical quality - they just don’t need and thus don’t have exotic fluorite lens elements and so on. Many of Canon’s prime lenses in the 35mm to 135mm range fit in this category - see below. And some recent EF-S lenses offer near-L image quality but lack the red ring and the tough build quality of contemporary L series lenses.

    Note also that the presence of a red ring around the end of a lens barrel only indicates an L series lens if it’s actually made by Canon. Some other makers happily paint red stripes around the end of their lenses too, but this in no way guarantees that the lens meets the quality standard of a Canon L lens.


stolen http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html

I know nothing about Canon lenses, except that when I bought my Pentax the Canon came last for quality of its 18-55, so I can understand why youd want rid of it. I can make 2 recommendations in terms of 3rd party lenses though.

If you dont use the wide end much, my Dad has the Sigma 24-60 F2.8 and it is stunning, if a little susceptable to flare compared to our Pentax glass. A superb buy for the price.

If youre feeling rich and like the wide stuff, the Tokina 16-50 F2.8 uses the same optical formula as Pentaxs top of the range DA* 16-50 (the * series being Pentaxs equivalent to Canons L series).

I dont need to worry about the wide stuff, Ive got (my current fav) Canon 10-22mm UWA

Will check those out.