Lens on a Budget

A friend on a tight budget has asked for recommendations for a zoom lens for a Canon, with a range more or less covering the span from 50-250mm.

I did some quick checking and found the Sigma 18-200 and the Sigma 70-300.

Any feedback on these lenses, or similar ones from other makers? Tokina, perhaps?

Like all of us, she's trying to do as much as she can with as little money as possible, but doesn't want to invest badly.

Tamron makes several lenses in this catagory. Their 18-270mm has had a lot of positive reviews, but it's about $100 more than the Sigma 70-300. Tamron also has a 28-300 in the price range of those you've listed. The 28-300 was the first lens I purchased as a budget minded amateur and I enjoyed using it and the results from it. Tamron also makes an 18-200 for about $100 less than those you've listed.

Before I upgraded to some better gear, I used a Tamron 18-250 on a Pentax K10d and was generally happy with the performance. It comes in a Canon mount and is about $450.

http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/18250_diII.asp

Thanks for the replies so far. I gave my friend the link to this thread, and she's watching too.

I'm also giving her a sales pitch on NPN while I'm at it, so join in and see if we can't drum up another convert!

For my Rebel XSi and XTi, I use a Canon EOS S lens 55-250mm, and consider it the best medium range lens I have. Compared to the Tamron 18-200 and 28-300 it is the sharpest of the the 3.

If you don't mind me saying so, most of the lenses mentioned so far will give decent quality but not spectacular. One suggestion to put into the mix is the white 70-200mm f/4. The optics are superb, and currently with the Canon instant rebate it's $599 with free shipping at B&H Photo (Amazon also). True, it has less range than the 55-250mm, but I dare say that in terms of contrast and sharpness, it'll walk most of the other zooms right off the dock. All 4 of the white 70-200mm series are optically nuts (f/4, f/4 w/IS, f/2.8, 2.8 w/IS). The f/4 series is much lighter than the 2.8, so hand holding will be easier to. I have the 2.8, and on a 5D2 it's nearly 6 pounds. That gets old after an hour of walking around the zoo with my family, so I highly suggest the f/4 version. The image quality is no short of superb.

Hank
I replied to this topic yesterday but apparently it didn't take.
I have bought both the Canon 28-135 and 70-300 refurbished. They both seemed like new. They are good lenses and I paid about 3/4 of the new price for them. When one had a problem after 4 years of use, Canon fixed it - no charge. All I paid was shipping one way.

I used to have a Sigma 70-300 for Nikon, probably an older version of the lens. It was very affordable and not bad, but not great. It was particularly soft at the macro setting.

This is all incredibly valuable feedback! On behalf of my friend, thanks a million. She's got lots of first-hand experience to ponder now, so I think she can make some logical decisions. Thanks to everyone so far, and anyone else that is willing to chime in.

one more recommendation for the 70-200 f4. great bang for the buck, and if bought used the resale is as good as the buying price.

My first Canon zoom for digital was the 70-300 IS lens. Although not near as sharp as the 2,8 300 ( or near as expensive) it does work quite well and I was happy with it for a while. You need the IS one though. Also I have had great results buying used gear on ebay.

Canon 70-200 F4 would be my choice. Its very sharp and light as said above and the price is in the ball field.