Sigma C 16-300mm f3.5-6.7 DC OS superzoom for Canon RF mount. User review 14 June 2025

 

Sigma 16-300mm at 63mm f8, direct sunlight falling across the scene. The lens does a good job with this easy subject in ideal light.

The enduring appeal of superzoom lenses is their versatility, with many having a zoom range of 16-25x and some even more.

Until recently one of the best ways into superzoom world was a bridge camera. These were very popular about ten years ago but in recent times camera makers have almost abandoned the genre.

My favourites were the Sony RX10.4, Pana-Lumix FZ1000.2 and Pana-Lumix FZ300.

Models using the Sony 15.9mm diagonal (so-called one inch)  20Mpx sensor delivered the best image quality and performance. Sadly these appear to have vanished from sight.

The only remaining bridge cams available new use the tiny 7.6mm diagonal sensor and most lack an EVF.

However there is some hope for superzoom users.

For 20 years, Tamron has been making superzooms for APSC crop sensor interchangeable lens cameras. In 2021 they released an 18-300mm model which is now available for several mounts including Fujifilm X, Sony E and Canon RF.

Upping the ante, Sigma has this year released a 16-300mm model for Fujifilm, Sony, Canon and L mount.

Lorikeet with Sigma 16-300mm at 300mm on the R7. We can see that where the sunlight shines across the bird's wing, feather detail is decently well resolved. But on the breast we just have a colored blur. The bokeh is pretty good here as the background foliage is not too close to the subject.

This bird is the partner to the one above, sitting on the same branch. This photo was made with the Canon RF 100-500mm L zoom on the R7. We can see clearly defined feather detail even the backlit shadow areas of the breast.  This is not to compare the two lenses directly as one cost four times as much the other and has a much smaller zoom range. This is just to make the point that if we pay more, in this case a lot more,  we can get better image quality.

I bought one as soon as it became available in Australia and have been putting the lens through its paces on a Canon EOS R7. My review findings are completely independent. Nobody gives me camera gear to borrow or keep and I have no predilection for any brand, having used most of them over the years.

My initial impressions are very positive. The lens comes in a well designed box with packaging of a higher order than we find with non-L Canon lenses. A lens hood is included. Are you listening Canon ??

The lens itself appears to be very well made, with excellent fit and finish. The zoom action is smoothly damped and there is no appreciable free play in the double extending inner barrel.

Sigma has done a commendable job in making the lens work like a Canon model in every way.

Autofocus is fast and mostly accurate with some misses at the long end of the zoom.

The stabiliser works well on the R7 with no problems that I could find.

At the wide end the lens is pleasingly compact for the type, but zooming out to the long end almost doubles the length which might be a problem if we would prefer to be inconspicuous.

By nature, superzooms tend to have very variable optical characteristics, depending on the focal length and aperture, focus distance, lighting conditions and camera body behind the lens. They are also more prone to sample variation than lenses with a smaller zoom range or higher price or both.

As a result we can find quite some variation in reviewer’s opinions about such a  lens. This does not necessarily mean one of them is right or the others wrong. Variation comes with the territory.

Overall I rate the optical characteristics of the Sigma 16-300mm as being typical of this type of lens. Resolution is best at the shorter focal lengths, declining towards the long end.

Resolution is best in the middle of the frame at all focal lengths and apertures with noticeable softening towards the periphery, most evident in the corners and on the short sides of the frame.

My copy of the lens is decently well centered for the type but is clearly softer on the left side than the right side in the middle of the zoom range.

The out of focus rendition (bokeh) is very variable, depending on the focal length, aperture and the spatial relationship between the subject in focus and the background/foreground. At its best, in the short to middle focal length range,  the bokeh is pleasingly smooth. But at the long end I encountered some rough bokeh with intrusive ni-sen double lining and donut shaped out of focus highlights.

Purple fringing is commonly found at high contrast edges at any focal length, but is usually correctable in Adobe Camera Raw.

Resistance to flare is good although blooming and veiling can be found with the sun or other bright light source in or just outside the frame.  I also found bleeding of highlights into adjacent dark areas especially at 300mm.

Distortion and vignetting are well controlled in JPGs or when using the lens profile in Adobe Camera Raw or lightroom.

Away from the test chart and in the real world, the lens does a good job, producing consistently sharp, clear photos in most circumstances. It works best with the sun or main light source behind or across the optical axis and best at the wide and middle parts of the zoom range.

Best aperture appears to be around f8 at any focal length.

Sigma 16-300mm on top, Canon RF-S 18-150mm below. Both at full zoom

Sigma 16-300mm at 41mm f8. Sunlight. No problems here.

Overall this lens gets a pretty good report card for an APSC crop sensor optic with an ambitious 18.75x zoom range.

But it will not find a place in my camera bag for several reasons which follow.

I will endeavour to explain this decision with reference to the Canon RF-S 18-150mm f3.5-6.7 which does have a permanent place in my camera bag.

The raison d’etre of superzoom lenses is that they can take the place of a whole bag full of interchangeable lenses. This is especially appealing if we are travelling, on holiday, hiking, attending a social occasion, walking the streets or for any reason don’t want the hassle of changing lenses.

Many use cases involve the wide and mid tele range of a superzoom.

In the 18-150mm focal length range the Canon is comfortably the better lens with better sharpness especially in the periphery of the frame and fewer aberrations.

If we are going on safari, visiting a wildlife park or zoo or we want to photograph birds, then the long end of the zoom comes into play. But the problem with many superzooms including the Sigma 16-300mm is they are not long enough or convincingly sharp enough for good quality results with these use cases. They lose contrast and sharpness just where we want all the sharpness, acutance and contrast we can get.

I ran a test chart comparison of the Sigma 16-300mm at 300mm versus the Canon RF-S 18-150mm at 150mm, upsized in Photoshop to the same image size. With the resulting images side-by-side on screen I have to look carefully at 100% to pick any difference between the two. The Sigma does have slightly better acutance on the finest print on my chart but I doubt we would notice that in most actual photographs.

Now consider that the Canon lens is less expensive, half the weight and half the volume of the Sigma.

Sigma 16-300mm at 70mm f8. No problems here although the corners are a bit soft especially on the left side

Sigma 16-300mm at 300mm f8. This appears decent until we look closely. Then we find nothing is really sharp even though the man is in focus.

To summarise, my lack of enthusiasm for the Sigma 16-300mm is not so much about this particular lens. It is also not about Canon vs Sigma. I have two Sigma lenses,  the 10-18mm f2.8 and 18-50mm f2.8. They are both excellent and have helped to make the Canon RF-S crop sensor system an attractive option for enthusiast photographers.

I think the real issue is the marginal viability of any superzoom lens on APSC cameras which have a sensor diagonal of 27mm (Canon) or 28mm (Sony).

Such lenses are better suited to the smaller 15.9mm diagonal sensors which could once be found in some good bridge cameras. In the Sony RX10.4 and Pana-Lumix FZ1000.2, both of which I used extensively several years ago, I found better sharpness and clarity across the frame at all focal lengths, with fewer aberrations. All this was achieved in a smaller package at a lower price than most of the potential APSC options.

The Canon EOS R7+ Sigma 18-300mm kit reviewed here sells for around AUD3200 in Australia today. For the same money we could select from a range of full frame and APSC options each of which might potentially deliver better image quality although with a smaller zoom range.

I think it is worth noting that mainstream lens makers have offered little support for superzoom lenses on interchangeable lens cameras over the years.

Sony released an 18-200mm for APSC in 2012, Nikon an 18-300mm for DX (APSC) in 2014, Olympus a 12-200mm for M43 in 2019 and Nikon surprisingly released a 28-400mm for full frame in 2024.

But the main supplier of these lenses has been Tamron, with Sigma now wanting a piece of the action.

Will camera makers bring back full featured bridge cams?

There are always rumors of course although most of these prove to be nothing more than a beat-up of wish lists.

I live in hope.

 

Sigma 16-300mm at 300mm f7.1 Some unpleasant foreground and background bokeh here