bjwags

Good evening! I have posted a question before regarding macro lenses. But i have been looking at lenses. I really would like a telephoto lens and pretty much decided to get a telephoto instead of a macro. Also I dont want to spend thousands of dollars for a lens as I am fairly new to serious photography and am really enjoying it. And I am getting older - 70!!! Yikes. I am not sure if I will stay with this hobby and/or stay healthy, so dont want to spend a ton of money at least till I learn more.. Anyway I was looking at lenses on the Adorama site and they have a Sigma lens i am interested in. It is a 18-300 mm F3.5 -6.3 DC Macro Os Hsm for Canon EOS dslr for $399.00 (regular price - $579). Is this a good lens for an old lady excited about photography?? I do mostly photos of flowers , birds, hopefully a hummingbird, landscape. the reviews are really good on this lens. Or should I just get a canon lens? Can I get a decent lens of up to 300 mm for less than $800 . this lens has me tempted but Idont want to waste my money. i am including some pictures I have taken with my camera - a Canon 5i using a 135mm lens that came with the camera. Thanks for any help.
Betsy

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Betsy, zoom lenses that advertise "Macro" are not macro lenses. I don't know the lens you are asking about but it sounds like it may suit your needs. If you are shooting mostly flowers and they are not small flowers you probably don't need a macro lens. What makes a lens a macro lens is that the image size on the sensor is equal to the actual size of your subject, so lets say for instance you were shooting the face of a watch, on your crop frame camera that would cover about the entire sensor so your picture would be only the face of the watch. If you want to get that close you will need a macro lens, if you just want to take pics like the one in this thread then there are many lenses that will accomplish that. When you look at lenses there are two items that you can pay attention to in their specifications, one is minimum focus distance, it will tell you how close you can get your sensor to the subject and still be able to focus the lens, then also pay attention to the maximum magnification, for instance for the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM the maximum magnification is 0.21 meaning that it is about 1/5 life size on your sensor, a macro lens would be 1.0 meaning life size on the sensor. The larger the number the larger the object will be in your image.

BudsOwl Loc: Upstate NY and New England

According to PhotoPlus magazine it was rated best on test when they tested it about a year ago and they list the current price at about $500. The lens weighs in at 585 grams and has image stabilization. A kilogram is just over two pounds so this lens weighs in at about 1.29 pounds. I assume your Canon is actually a T5i. The combination with the Sigma should serve you well. Good luck and let us know what you finally bought.
Bud

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

The closest lens Canon makes to the Sigma 18-300 is my favorite utility lens, the EF 28-300 f/3.5-5.6L IS USM, and new it costs around $2400. I believe that should answer your question about which lens to buy.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Yes but you are talking about an L lens. Canon makes similar lenses that are either EFs or kit lenses that are much les expensive.
SS

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Betsy, welcome to the Hog!
This may not be for you and I don't know what other lenses you may already have but another way to do Macro photography on the cheap is to get a set of extension tubes. Tubes can help you fill your frame but you DO lose infinity focus that's not needed while shooting macro.
There are inexpensive manual tubes and more expensive EOS tubes that have full Auto focus and camera functions while in use. Just an Idea to consider!
SS

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I have yet to see a 10X or more zoom that has good image quality across it's entire range of focal lengths. At the short end, there is complex distortion, barrel distortion, significant loss of illumination at the corners, chromatic aberration, etc. At the long end, image softness across the frame is a common issue. If you can find a 100-300mm F4 Sigma, it is a very good at all focal lengths and it would be within your budget. A Canon 70-200 F4 only costs $600. Both are better at 200mm than a super zoom would be. Instead of trying to do it all with one lens consider getting two lenses, one for wide angle to short tele range, and another that covers short tele to medium tele.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Years ago I purchased a Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 II DC OS HSM EF-S on sale and am very pleased with it. (They may have changed the model since though.) I couldn't justify $1,500+ for a lens. I have a T1i by the way.
(I'm not shooting for NATGEO either. )
I also purchased a set of Kenko extension tubes for macro shots.

hookedupin2005 Loc: Northwestern New Mexico

You may want to look at the Tamron 18-400mm lens.... I have read some good reviews on it.

hookedupin2005 Loc: Northwestern New Mexico

$649.00 @ B&H

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Betsy, currently I have a Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS listed in the Buy/Sell area of the forum, if you are looking at spending $800 you might consider my lens, it would be a little more but not much because I would cover shipping. The lens is in excellent condition. If interested send me a PM.

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-522265-1.html#8857401

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

You might look into getting a set of good quality closeup lenses for about $80. They go on like a filter and can give very acceptable results, especially for field work and casual use. On your camera, that 135mm lens is equivalent to a 216mm telephoto on a full frame sensor and that will give you a decent working distance for your closeups. Back in the day (I'm 73) I took lots of closeups with my 135 and a set of extension tubes.

peterg Loc: Santa Rosa, CA

That's what I use. Extension tubes are inexpensive. Retains optical quality of your lens. You'll have to experiment to determine the right combination of tube(s) to use. Will have to manually focus. Autofocus has little value when taking macros.

out4life2016 Loc: Bellingham, Washington

Betsy
I recently purchased a Tamron 28-300mm Macro 1:3.5-6.3 Aspherical DI lens for my Canon T3 at a local pawn shop for 50 dollars. One good thing about pawn shops is if you take your camera with you most times they will allow you to step outside and shoot a few pics to see if you like. This lens sell new for roughly 500 dollars and has image stabilization. Its a nice range of zoom and so far I am happy with it. The sigma is probably the better of the two but for the price I couldn't pass it by. Canon makes nice gear but you do pay more for the name. The question that I ask is why do you feel you need a telephoto?

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

IMO, the Sigma 18-300 is the best of the WIDE range zooms ! Having said that, if you are more serious about longer focal lengths and faster/accurate auto-focusing, and a lens that would "fit" well with your 18-135, I would recommend the new/latest Canon 70-300 IS II nano - a GREAT lens. For closer-up work with this lens get a 12mm extension tube or a Canon D500 close-up lens with adapter ring. You will also need to buy the Canon lens hood separately - and of course, a nice case.

..