18-125 lens good?

[amolkhedgikar]

Hi guys, I need some inputs.
anyone uses
Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC IF Aspherical Zoom Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras ?

how much difference does the IF make(good or bad)?
I have read mixed reviews about this one.
Is it good for the canon 400d/rebel xti as a walk around lens?
thanks

[Photo-John]

I just looked at our user reviews for that lens. The average is pretty good, although as you said, they are a bit mixed. Here's a link to those reviews, in case you haven't looked at them:

Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC Lens Reviews >>

The price is very attractive. But from my point of view, that's a lot of glass for not enough money. I think it's asking too much to expect to be happy with it. Of course, different people have different expectations. But I would feel better buying something shorter that I can have more confidence in.

[Ridgetop]

I bought it along with my Canon 30D. My overall impression is that it is very inconsistent. It's definitely soft when full open (i.e. F3.5 or 5.6) but gets better around F8. I've got very mixed feelings about the lense at this point. In order to get results that I want I'm definitely going with F8 or so on all shots. I know it's a 3rd party lense and not the top of line optics by any means, but it so far has been a disappointment, at least when shooting near the wide open mark.

[amolkhedgikar]

Thanks John and Ridgetop,
I tried the kit 18-55 lens. it is useless to me not because of its quality but its range. I shoot mostly wild animals so my subjects turn out to just dots in the picture with 18-55 and am too much of a novice to really comment on the finer aspects of photography with different lenses. I am classic example of the idealistic fool/beginer who thinks this range is all I need and really doesn't know what all is compromised for the range.
most of my budget is spent on the camera(400 D). If I can survive for a year with 18-125 then next year I can upgrade. Till then I hope to learn the basics and how digital photography really works.
This is the only one that comes close to my requirement in range and fits my budget. right now I cant afford two best quality lenses.
so what do you say guys? I need more help from your experience
Waiting for more inputs
thank you

[Photo-John]

Consider keeping the kit lens for general purpose photos. And take a look at the Canon 28-135mm IS. Optically it should be much better, it's a little longer, and the image stabilization will help you with long shots. I can personally vouch for the 28-135 IS, too. I have used it for years and sold quite a few photos taken with it.

Read and write reviews for the Canon 28-135mm IS lens >>

Please post a review for your XTi, too! We need more reviews for that camera. Don't worry about whether you've had it long enough or are qualified to post. Everyone is qualified and everyone's experience is valuable. Plus, if you want to update your review later, just let me know.

[another view]

I haven't used that lens but reviews sometimes need to be taken with a grain of salt, so to speak. I look more at the number of reviews and the overall rating than anything. I also look mainly at the low ratings and see what they don't like. Like John says, some times people seem to expect more than they really should for a piece of equipment, so personally I discard those. I have a lens that doesn't have the greatest ratings, but it's really an excellent lens - one of the sharpest I've used (including some with excellent reputations). That lens is the Tokina 28-80 ATX-PRO. I don't know if all of these lenses are as good as mine, but in this case I bought it used from a friend and knew it was good.

It seems like a decent lens for the money, but 125mm isn't that long for wildlife. You might want to consider a lens in the 70-300 range, and use this with the kit lens.

[amolkhedgikar]

Thanks John, that's a good option. Earlier I was keen on a single lens but now I am (slowly) realising that I cant have my cake and eat it too. will certainly post a review but I think I am too new for that.
Thanks Another view, is the 70-300 good enough if it fits my budget? cos if it fits my budget,its cheap. is it in the same league as the kit lens? I found so many of 70-300s, which one do you think should be not too bad and fit under $200? I know I am pushing it but I am really in a dilemma.
Guys what do you think about sigma18-200?

[Photo-John]

Right now I am thinking another view has the right idea. I think a 70-300 would best compliment your kit lens. Check the lens reviews to see what people like. The reviews will be mixed for lenses in your price range. But as long as you go into it knowing you're making a compromise, you shouldn't be disappointed. But if you're serious about photography, start saving for something better. As 70-300mm lenses under $300 just can't be that good. They will allow you to get the shot, though.

[another view]

...and I think John summed it up pretty well at the end of his post. A sub-$300 lens won't be the greatest but it will get you out there taking pictures. It's better to be shooting and learning than saving for the best gear or waiting for the next model to be coming out.

Get it, go out and shoot and down the road you'll figure out if it works well for you or if something else will work better for you. That's the real reason to upgrade IMO.

[amolkhedgikar]

Cant thank you enough you both.
That idea can not be denied. I'd rather be taking pictures. Down the road I will also remember these valuable inputs I started with.
Please let me know anything you might want to share.
Thank you again
Amol

[amolkhedgikar]

guys I need more help.
canon EF 75-300 F/4.0-5.6 IS USM for canon 35 mm slrs
can I use this lens for rebel xti? What are the advantages and disadvantages?

you can see it at-
http://www.photographyreview.com/sf-...=100_mm_299_mm

[freygr]

guys I need more help.
canon EF 75-300 F/4.0-5.6 IS USM for canon 35 mm slrs
can I use this lens for rebel xti? What are the advantages and disadvantages?

you can see it at-
http://www.photographyreview.com/sf-...=100_mm_299_mm

I have a 70-300, and for nature photography it's still on the very short size for birds. And for dear sized game it's still on the short size. If it wasn't an F5.6 I would get a doubler for it.

[amolkhedgikar]

Thanks Frey, I know what you are trying to say.
I am Just getting started. I know that 70-300 is quite short I saw it with fellow biologists. but considering I was thinking of 18-125or200, it is decent. My biggest constraint is the budget. and cant even dream of those big ones right now.but they are already on my wish list.

[another view]

True, 300 is pretty short for wildlife but it'll be a night and day difference between it and the 55 you have now. It seems like the next logical step to me, and will suit you well for a lot of different situations. IS lenses are nice but they're not perfect. A good sturdy tripod would probably be the next thing on your list, and a requirement for anything longer than this lens (but truthfully they can be almost essential for any focal length).

[amolkhedgikar]

Another view, there are no doubts about that range any more.

the lens I mentioned above has been discontinued by canon.( it was too good to be real at that price). on our site the only dealer claiming to have it in stock is misleading.

One more thing, how much does the USM matter? ritz camera is offering the rebel xti kit with 18-55 and 75-300 mm (no usm) at $900. looks good but I was not sure of the 75-300. If the USM doesnt matter too much , I still have an option to upgrade to that 2 lens kit. what do you think?
Which tripod do you suggest to start with ? I have never used one and am sure going to need a decent one.

[another view]

I don't know that USM is really necessary but it is nice. I only own one lens that has it (I'm a Nikon guy so different terminology) and actually it's the lens that probably needs it the least (Sigma 10-20). It's probably more beneficial with longer focal lengths because the focusing ring has to turn more when focusing. That Sigma lens probably travels about 90 degrees or less from MFD (minimum focusing distance) to infinity and a 300mm lens might need a turn and a half (or 540 degrees).

There may be other differences between a USM and non-USM lens but that difference alone isn't the end of the world IMO. It will cost more - this means that the focusing motor is built into the lens instead of using the one in the camera body. Again I'm a Nikon guy so correct me if I'm wrong here but I think it's the same as their AF-S lenses. Generally they'll focus quicker, quieter and can be manually focused by just turning the focusing ring rather than switching the camera body to manual focus mode first.

I compared a Nikon AF-S and non-AF-S lens, and these were really the only differences between the two. It was the 80-200 f2.8 when the AF-S was pretty new, and I didn't see a night & day difference in focusing speed. If I was making a living shooting sports I'd have probably bought but I'm not so I didn't. For the record, it was with a pretty fast camera (F100). Since you're using the camera's focusing motor for comparison, the camera focusing speed now can become an issue. Pro bodies will be faster, no doubt about it - but I turned this post into way more of a book than I needed to, and it's not really worth worrying about. It's one of those things like I said before, if the limiting factor of getting your shot depends on focus speed then it's a good time to upgrade to something faster. I'll bet in the real world that it won't be that big of a deal...

[amolkhedgikar]

this is turning out to br a very good conversation for me. so an Even 'bigger' book would be welcome I think its time for action. Thank you very much for your patience and everything else. Please enlighten me if you have any new ideas.
Thanks again
Amol