*** *** Target group
This lens is certainly not aimed at the professional photographer. It's more for the amateur clippers. Whoever complained here for luminous intensity and Co, must always have in mind. Reasonable price and high zoom range have always their base.
>>> To select / comparison
*** Image quality and focal length ***
As for picture quality, I can reassure the skeptics equal. In our pictures we could neither blur, nor vignetting nor recognize distortions. Neither the Sigma, yet the Canon. Both lenses have convinced us in terms of image quality (for the price). Surely there are better lenses. But who does not intend to draw up a 5-meter poster, which will hardly notice differences for his amateur photography. And differences I evidence in the lab, do not interfere in daily life but.
Sigma offers a little more with 250mm focal length than the Canon with 135mm. In fact, the difference is in the Zoom Factor "surprisingly low noticeable. Why the 250mm constitute no argument for Sigma for us.
Measured by value: Canon (+++) | Sigma (+++)
*** *** Processing
Both lenses act basically rather favorable. They are mostly made of plastic, and surprisingly light. But here the Canon scores more: When you adjust the focal length of the Sigma can vary slightly and stiff set. At least not uniformly. In addition, the tube droned out after just two weeks, whereby the lens export by itself, once you held the camera down. The Canon had no significant processing disadvantages.
Measured by value: Canon (+++) | Sigma (+)
*** Autofocus (see video) ***
Now we come to Ko criterion for Sigma: The autofocus of the Sigma works significantly slower than the Canon. When we wanted to create a video with the Sigma, we were shocked: The focus motor, though billed with super quiet, but rattled like crazy. In the video you hear by nothing else. We thought it was a failure and complained. Amazon sent us twice in total compensation. But with all lenses the same thing: The engine is incredibly loud. By comparison, the Canon is inaudible really significantly faster and more. (See video)
All in all this was the reason for us to keep the Canon.
Measured by value: Canon (+++) | Sigma (-)
*** Conclusion:
For 300-350 is obtained (as of today), the Sigma
For 350-400 is obtained (as of today), the Canon
For Sigma only addresses the slightly higher focal length, although not convinced in the results. Processing and overall impression are higher at Canon. The autofocus of the Sigma is a no-go.
PS: The button under this review is not a like-butts a la Facebook. He should not express, if you share my opinion, but only if you, the notes appear in this review as a "helpful". Unfortunately you have to give this notice to the fans of an article in critical reviews.
