Customer Reviews

Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM IF Lens for Canon AF Digital SLR Cameras filter size 72

5 star:		(25)
4 star:		(14)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I just recently bought this lens primarily for its Optical Stabilization technology.
My past lens the Sigma 28-300 was a great all around lens but it didn't have the image stabilization that this lens does. This lens with the range of 18-250 actually works better for an all around lens. I was a bit skeptical about the OS (IS Canon) technology but after using a Canon 70-200 2.8 IS. I couldn't go back to my sigma 28-300 without OS. I mean the difference was and is well worth the extra cost. I zoomed in all the way with the OS and without the OS on a rusted mailbox. The OS showed all the rust particles, the Non-OS showed blurred particles. That convinced me it was worth it. That extra crispness makes all the difference. Also, the price for this lens was outstanding when compared to the closest competition. I didn't really want the Tamron, and I wasn't about to pay 2,300 for the Canon 28-300 IS 3.5-5.6 that's nuts. Closer to 1,000 I might have. But this lens as far as I can tell is just as good as the Canon for a lot less expensive. I have NEVER and I repeat never had a problem with my previous Sigma lens. I had the 28-300 for about 3 or more years. And the image quality was always right up there with my Canon lens. I work with a 24-70 2.8L and a 70-200 2.8L IS, as well has 16-35 2.8L, my sigma photo quality kept up with if not is equal to them. Though the L series are built very heavy duty and are really great lens all around. The image quality is not all that superior if any. With the OS on this new lens the only advantage to a L series Canon would be the better build and better dust and weather resistance. But by all means the Sigma 18-250 is a all around winner for anyone wanted an all around lens.

I was hesitant when it came to this lens. I have had Sigma lenses for >10 yrs and liked them, but found little to know information about this lens and was leaning toward the Tamron 18-275. The Sigma was about $30 less and I have never had trouble with my 3 other lenses. I even had Sigma replace one whose chip did not play well with my 20D, so I feel some loyalty to them. On preliminary use, it is about a pound and feels solid, and well made. Some complained about the mechanism being tight about half way from 18-250, I did not find it any more tight then my 28-70 or my 70-300 both by Sigma. The images are sharp generally except for the extremes on either end, so I will just avoid the very end of each side of the zoom range. I have not put the stabilization to the test yet, from what I can tell it does add about 2 stops and makes the hand held shots passable at longer focal lengths that would not have worked with out it. The other bonus is the rapid focus and quiet operation of the HSM.

The one trade off and the reason for 4 vs. 5 is the weight. I have an 18-200 that does not have stabilization and the images at full or near full zoom are not so crisp (not the fault of the lens, but my not so steady hands). I always keep a monopod with me to minimize the shake, but this is not so convenient, so theOS is the reason behind the new Sigma. I understand the trade off for sharp pictures is some extra mechanics, but, it Sigma is reading this, shedding a little weight in the next version will go a long way. My only other comment is the f6.3 make it a bit dark at the high end of the zoom, again, trade offs are needed. If you use this outside you should be fine, but inside at a school play you may still need the monopod (got mine from REI - it is walking stick that has a removable head where you can attach your camera for about $60! REI Hiker Shock Light Staff) Over all I am very happy with another Sigma lens. and my next lens will be a 30 mm f1.4 prime sigma!

Follow up 30 May 2009 - I had some more time to use the lens and found the OS works very well. I will post some images, but hand held at 1/15 gives a nice crisp image at f5.6. I don't have the most steady hands in the world and these shots at 250 mm would never have been worth anything before the advent of OS for hand held shots. Other shots in the 18-80 range are nice and sharp from about f5.3 and up. Very happy and with 17th St. Photo as well, very fast shipping and easy to deal with. Great lens for the money

Bought this lens as I can not imagine myself carrying two lenses and changing lenses in dusty outdoors. I was comparing this lens with Canon 18-200 and Tamron 18-270. Bought this for these reasons:
1. Cheaper than the other two.
2. Lowest barrel distortion
3. Better build quality compared to canon
4. Has HSM. No USM on canon
5. Hood included
6. Highest number of SLD glass elements

Had it for 2 months now and used it in variety of conditions. Very happy with the result. I can only compare it with canon 18-55 kit lens. Surprisingly, sharpness of this lens is better than the kit lens. It has faster and quieter focus too (due to HSM). The OS works flawlessly. At 250mm I can see the image stabilize in the viewfinder after abt 1/2 second. Build quality and grip feel is very good. Hood is pretty solid too. Hood and filters do not rotate while focusing. Due to its weight I still use 18-55 indoors.

Thank goodness for the internet. If it was left to Nikon or Canon we'd be arrested for dare thinking of getting a Sigma.

I own a D200 and have been wanting to upgrade my two nikkor lenses (18-70mm and 70-300mm) for ages but the Nikon prices are....crazy. I was set on the Nikon 18-200mm VR but went and did some research. This Sigma lens has impressed the cynics all over photography reviews. Its sharp, it doesn't have 'lens creep' which the Nikon 18-200 VR got badly and its keeps its sharpness right throughout the zoom.

There is a complete snobbery around zoom lenses. They're seen as 'travel' lenses. Yeah right. I think you can potentially do more damage to your camera constantly changing your lenses over, especially in dusty environments. I want to get a good lens, and basically keep it on the camera body as long as possible.

I would class myself as a amateur photographer. I run a web site which constantly puts wildlife shots on it, mainly deer. I have purchased this lens and its simply fantastic. I feel like I've got a great sturdy lens. The sigma has a very solid feel to it. Some might find it a little heavy, I think its great. My nikon 70-300 was light as a feather and I think its was due to cheap componants and lack of VR or OS.

Some moaned that its too loud when focusing in AF mode using OS.Rubbish. Its as quiet as a church mouse. Some people like to pick things out that simply aren't there.

I wouldn't hesitate in recommending this lens. To be fair Sigmas don't hold value as much as Nikons in the lens,due to perceptions, but I don't like buying 2nd hand lens anyway.

Dont let the propoganda stop you. Fire up the google and see the reviews for yourself. This lens is punching well above its weight and is/has gained a lot of fans.

I bought this lens before a recent trip to Australia. I've been using the 18-55mm that came with my EOS and a Canon 22-200mm. The 18-55mm suits 80% of my needs normally but I find that I use the telephoto a lot when traveling. So this lens replaces them both. I still brought the 18-55mm with me but 90% of the time I had the Sigma on the camera. It worked very well. The zoom is smooth and the autofocus worked well. The few times I needed to use manual focus I found the focus ring fell right at hand and worked well. I took 2000 pictures in a variety of conditions and the images look great. It was especially handy for wildlife shots.

One downside is that it's a relatively slow lens (f-stop). I can't really call it a complaint because I knew what I was getting and a faster lens is quite a bit more expensive.

The image stabilization seems to work well. I have not tried any comparisons with it on or off yet--I left it on the entire trip. However I did take several hundred pictures during a whale watch cruise. The seas were rough and the boat was moving and I was at maximum zoom taking photos of whales breeching. Everything worked a treat. Of course some were blurry but most were razor sharp.

The only 'complaint' is that the lens is heavy. There's a lot of glass in it, so that's understandable, but it gets to be a pain in the neck (literally) after a while. I'll be looking for a better strap next. When carrying the camera, the lens ends up hanging down. After a while it loosened up enough that it would extend on its own. I started using the zoom lock and have begun to build up the muscle memory to unlock it when I bring the camera into position. Unfortunately, the lock button is very close to the autofocus button and on several occasions I flipped that while trying to lock or unlock the lens. Not a big deal, though.

Overall I'm very happy with the lens and the pictures it took and the price was quite reasonable.

I studied up pretty extensively on the super zoom lenses available. I was torn between the Tamron, Canon and Sigma. I tested the Canon and the USM motor was great but the lens was quite a bit more than the Tamron and Sigma. The Tamron had a bit more range but the focus speed seemed a bit slow and had a hard time locking on. I decided to go with the Sigma because the quality seemed a little better than the Tamron and it just seemed like a more durable lens.

I am by no means a professional but I do enjoy taking great photos. I also enjoy not worrying about changing lenses all the time. The Sigma 18-250 gives me the ability to shoot wide or zoomed in within seconds. I have had it for about six months and have enjoyed it thoroughly.

I would highly recommend this lens to anyone that is looking for a super zoom lens.

Camera Body - Canon EOS Xti

I have own this lens for 6 months and used with my Canon T2i for vacations and family activities. The lens construction is robust and high quality. The stabilizer and the HSM works fantastic. The picture quality is very good of course taking in account the typical limitations of a lens of this wide focal distance range. I have some doubts to buy the Tamron 18-270 mm instead this one but now I'm shure that this is the better choice because the HSM and picture quality. I recommend it as a very useful lens for general use. I have read some comments about the softness picture quality of this lens but it was not my case because I have taken acceptable sharp pictures in all the zoom range. I really recommend it because the price, quality, features (IS and HSM) and because at the moment Canon doesn't offer an alternative that cover all this characteristics.

I have compared this lens with the Canon EFS 18-135 IS in 18 and 135 focal distance and no noticeable difference was detected. Both lens obtain sharp images.

Other reviews are spot on about great build quality, lack of zoom creep, fast auto-focus, built-in flash shadow at wide angle and functional, while said to be less efficient than comptetitor's, optical stabilizer feature. Seem to produce decent macro shots.

I'm one of those who complaints about excessive softness which pretty much makes all the pros less relevant. Perhaps I'm spoiled from using the vastly superior Tamron 28-75mm/f2.8 over last couple of years but the lack of sharpness on my several test shots is somewhat disappointing. I'm using it with the aging Canon 300D body and with this lens it tends to produce underexposed images which are also under-saturated despite the fact that 300D tends to add saturation/sharpness by default to please its intended not very sophisticated user. I understand that the lack of sharpness is a non-issue for 4x6 prints and downsized pictures intended for web-sharing, however you'll clearly see it while looking at a full-screen slide show on a 24" monitor.

I'm fighting the temptation to return the lens thinking I just need to step down (no pun intended) my expectations to reality that other super-zooms are not much better anyways and will present a different set of problems.

Update: after a week of use I came to conclusion that sharpness is adequate for this lens' intended usage. Surely the lens won't win any sharpness contests but overall this lens represent very nice balance of image quality, features, versatility and build at a reasonable price. Still not quite a 5-star for some noticeable off-center softness, but it is a very solid 4. I wish it would let more light in to be more usable for indoor use, but competitors in the same price range aren't better in that respect either.

Hello, I own a Canon T2i Rebel camera that originally came with two lenses: the standard 18-55mm and an a 55-250mm telephoto, both with Image Stabilization, both made by Canon. I had enjoyed my camera for abut 6 months, but carrying both lenses while traveling is always unpleasant; and even worse! Changing between lenses while playing the tourisVt is slow and uncomfortable-you'll think twice if you really want that picture. Since I bought the Sigma 18-250mm lens; I travel lighter And my camera is always ready for both portraits, landscapes, and far away objects like wildlife. This lens has made travelling with my camera more fun! I am very glad I bought it!

I have had this lens for 6 months now. I got it brand new along with my 7D. I decided to get the 7D body and this lens instead of a kit lens, and I'm glad I did. I have shot probably 10,000 pictures in the last six months, and I have used this lens on probably 80% of those. It is the only lens I ever need for general outdoor photography. Having he ability to go from 18mm for landscapes to 250mm for detail shots and macro is awesome. Yes, it is a macro lens. I can focus up to about six inches from the glass. With a cheap set of extension tubes I can focus with the subject literally touching the glass! Zoomed in, this lens gives great bokeh, even though it's not as fast as the Canon 70-200 for instance.

The only bad things I notice about this thing are that you notice a fair bit of fringing on high contrast edges when doing macro shooting. This can generally be fixed by changing lighting. It also has a slight barrel distortion at 18mm that is easy to fix (although you lose a little of your picture) in post.

Overall I give this thing five stars. You can find plenty of lenses that are better at one part of the zoom spectrum than this, but I don't think there is a multi-purpose zoom that rivals this one out there.