I want to get an eos 300 and will get the 28-90usm lens if nothing else presents itself within my price range, but does anyone know if the sigma 28-200 dl hyper lense is any good? if so should i get it over the 28-90usm as i can't afford a 28-105 or 28-135usm at the moment.

-- Dominic Bell (dominic@hotmail.com), April 28, 2002

Answers

All of the current 28-200's(including Canon and Nikon, tamron and Sigma) are only sharp from f8. Sigma is the lowest quality construction of the four, also sigma has the famous compatibility problems with new Canons. Please save your money for the Canon 28-105, or look in POP photo for a grey market deal. JC

-- joe cap (joemocap@yahoo.com), April 28, 2002.

The Canon 28-105USM is real cheap (about $250). I can't imagine that any name brand (Sigma, Tamron) super zoom is cheaper.

-- kenneth katz (socks@bestweb.net), April 28, 2002.

Actually at B&H Photo, you can get a gray market Canon 28-105 USM for about $215, but the Sigma 28-200 DL is still cheaper at about $190.

The Canon 28-105 is by far the better lens, but if the choices are just between a Canon 28-90 USM or the Sigma 28-200, I think I'd choose the Sigma. The Cheap Canon is not all that good. From 28- 90mm the Sigma will be as sharp, or nearly as sharp, as the Canon, although it will probably exhibit more distortion, but the Sigma adds another 110mm to the long end.

-- Jim Strutz (j.strutz@gci.net), April 28, 2002.