 |
Captured with the Sigma 16-300mm at 63mm f8, illuminated by direct sunlight. The lens performs admirably with this straightforward subject under optimal lighting. |
Superzoom lenses are popular due to their flexibility, with many offering a zoom range between 16x to 25x or more.
In the past, a common way to explore the superzoom category was through bridge cameras, which saw significant popularity about a decade ago. However, camera manufacturers have largely stepped back from producing these types of cameras lately.
Among my favorites are the Sony RX10.4, Pana-Lumix FZ1000.2, and Pana-Lumix FZ300.
Cameras equipped with the Sony 15.9mm diagonal (known as one-inch) 20MP sensor provided exceptional image quality and performance. Unfortunately, these models seem to have disappeared from the market.
Currently, the only new bridge cameras available feature a smaller 7.6mm diagonal sensor and most lack an electronic viewfinder (EVF).
Nevertheless, superzoom enthusiasts may find some hope on the horizon.
For two decades, Tamron has specialized in superzooms designed for APSC crop sensor interchangeable lens cameras. In 2021, they launched an 18-300mm model compatible with various mounts, including Fujifilm X, Sony E, and Canon RF.
In addition, Sigma has released a 16-300mm model this year for Fujifilm, Sony, Canon, and L mount cameras.
 |
Lorikeet taken with the Sigma 16-300mm at 300mm on the R7. Notice the feather details well-captured on the wing under sunlight, while the breast area appears less defined. The bokeh effect is pleasing, as the foliage in the background isn’t too close. |
 |
This is the mate of the previous bird, perched on the same branch, but captured with the Canon RF 100-500mm L zoom on the R7. The feather details are sharply defined, even in backlit shadow areas. This isn’t to directly compare the two lenses, as one is significantly pricier and has a much narrower zoom range. It simply highlights that spending more can lead to better image quality. |
Once it was available in Australia, I purchased it immediately and have been thoroughly testing this lens on a Canon EOS R7. My review is entirely impartial; no one lends me equipment to test or lets me keep it, and I’ve used various brands over the years.
My first impressions are highly favorable. The lens comes nicely packaged in a box that exceeds what you’d normally find with standard non-L Canon lenses. It even includes a lens hood—are you paying attention, Canon?
The construction of the lens appears top-notch, showcasing excellent craftsmanship. The zoom mechanism operates smoothly, with no noticeable slack in the extending inner barrel.
Sigma has done a commendable job ensuring this lens performs similarly to Canon models in every aspect.
The autofocus speed is quick and generally precise, although occasional misses occur at extended zoom lengths.
The stabilization features function effectively on the R7, showing no notable issues.
At the lower end of the zoom range, the lens is surprisingly compact, but when fully extended to its long zoom, its size nearly doubles, which might hinder those who prefer to be discreet while shooting.
Naturally, superzooms can exhibit diverse optical characteristics influenced by several factors, such as focal length, aperture, focusing distance, lighting conditions, and the camera type used. They also tend to showcase greater inconsistencies than lenses with narrower zoom ranges or those priced higher.
This results in varied opinions among reviewers regarding such lenses. This doesn’t imply any reviewer is correct while others are not; variability is inherent in this category.
Overall, I find the optical quality of the Sigma 16-300mm to be standard for its type. Resolution is highest at shorter focal lengths but diminishes at the longer ranges.
The sharpest resolution occurs in the center of the frame across all focal lengths and apertures, with noticeable softening towards the edges, particularly in the corners and shorter sides.
My specific lens is reasonably well-aligned for its type, but it noticeably lacks sharpness on the left side compared to the right in the middle of the zoom range.
The quality of the out-of-focus areas (bokeh) varies widely, depending on focal length, aperture, and the distance between the focused subject and background/foreground. At its best, particularly at shorter to mid-focal lengths, the bokeh is nicely smooth. However, at the long end, I observed some rough bokeh with distracting double outlining and circular out-of-focus highlights.
Purple fringing is often visible at high-contrast boundaries across all focal lengths but can usually be corrected in Adobe Camera Raw.
Flare resistance is commendable, although some blooming and veiling effects may occur with sunlight or other bright light sources either in or near the frame. I also noted some highlight bleeding into adjacent darker areas, particularly at 300mm.
Distortion and vignetting are effectively managed in both JPEGs and when utilizing the lens profile in Adobe Camera Raw or Lightroom.
In practical settings away from test charts, the lens performs well, consistently delivering sharp and clear images under most circumstances.
For optimal performance, position the sun or primary light source behind or to the side of the optical axis, particularly effective in the wider and mid-range of the zoom.
The ideal aperture seems to be approximately f8 across all focal lengths.
 |
Sigma 16-300mm above, Canon RF-S 18-150mm below. Both fully zoomed. |
 |
Sigma 16-300mm at 41mm f8. Bright sunlight, no issues detected. |
This lens gets a commendable評価 for a crop sensor optic with its ambitious 18.75x zoom range.
However, I won’t be adding it to my camera bag for several reasons.
I’ll contrast this with the Canon RF-S 18-150mm f3.5-6.7, which has a permanent spot in my kit.
Superzoom lenses are designed to replace a whole set of interchangeable lenses, making them appealing for travel, holidays, hiking, social events, or any situation where changing lenses can be inconvenient.
Many scenarios take advantage of the wide and mid-telephoto ranges of a superzoom.
Within the 18-150mm range, the Canon lens significantly outperforms with improved sharpness, particularly in the frame’s corners, and fewer optical aberrations.
In cases like safaris or visits to wildlife parks, the longer end of the zoom is essential. Unfortunately, many superzooms, including the Sigma 16-300mm, often lack sufficient length or sharpness for high-quality results. They typically give up contrast and sharpness precisely where we most desire them.
I conducted a comparison between the Sigma 16-300mm at 300mm and the Canon RF-S 18-150mm at 150mm, upscaling the images in Photoshop to the same dimensions. Upon viewing them side-by-side at 100%, I had to examine closely to see any differences. While the Sigma had a slight edge in acutance on the smallest details, it’s unlikely that difference would be noticeable in most real-life photos.
Additionally, keep in mind that the Canon lens is more affordable, lighter, and takes up less space compared to the Sigma.
 |
Sigma 16-300mm at 70mm f8. No issues, although the corners are a bit soft, particularly on the left side. |
 |
Sigma 16-300mm at 300mm f8. It looks decent until observed closely, revealing a lack of sharpness despite focus being on the subject. |
In summary, my lack of enthusiasm for the Sigma 16-300mm isn’t solely about the lens itself, nor is it a Canon versus Sigma matter. I own two Sigma lenses, the 10-18mm f2.8 and the 18-50mm f2.8, both of which excel and contribute to making the Canon RF-S crop sensor system a compelling choice for photography enthusiasts.
The larger issue lies with the practicality of superzoom lenses on APSC cameras featuring diagonal sensors of 27mm (Canon) or 28mm (Sony).
These lenses perform better with smaller sensors of 15.9mm diagonal, previously seen in quality bridge cameras. In models like the Sony RX10.4 and Panasonic Lumix FZ1000.2, which I extensively used years back, I experienced superior sharpness and clarity across various focal lengths with fewer optical flaws—all in a more compact and cost-effective package than many APSC alternatives.
Currently, the Canon EOS R7 paired with the Sigma 18-300mm kit retails for about AUD3200 in Australia. For the same investment, a selection of full frame and APSC alternatives could yield better image quality, albeit with a reduced zoom range.
It’s noteworthy that mainstream lens manufacturers have historically provided limited support for superzoom lenses for interchangeable lens cameras.
Sony introduced an 18-200mm for APSC in 2012, Nikon launched an 18-300mm for DX in 2014, Olympus followed with a 12-200mm for M43 in 2019, and Nikon surprisingly produced a 28-400mm for full frame in 2024.
However, Tamron remains the principal supplier of these lenses, with Sigma now eager to join that market.
Will camera manufacturers revive fully-featured bridge cameras? There are always rumors circulating, but often they turn out to be just that—unsubstantiated wishes.
I remain optimistic.
