alamomike47 Loc: San Antonio, Texas

Agree

jazzman1 Loc: South Of The Border

I considered both lens before I bought the Sigma 18-300mm. My main concern was IQ and from all my research Sigma won that battle, if even only slightly. But the real deciding factor was the fact that Sigma was newer, I assumed maybe even better technology, and it was. It's one of the Sigma lens that's compatible with their Sigma Dock. With the Dock one can get firmware updates, and micro adjust the lens for my camera. Being able to do this with the Sigma lens means greater compatibility of more lens. And with firmware updates it won't soon be obsolete as many other of Sigma's older lens are. And most older Sigma lens are not usable with this dock. I thought this was a powerful reason to choose the Sigma over Tamron, even if everything between them was even...or even if Tamron held an slight IQ edge. In fact, from now on, any Sigma lens I purchase must be compatible with this Dock, if not I won't buy it. .

Bill Emmett Loc: Bow, New Hampshire

You ask a lot of questions, but just select "quote reply" to address the post you're questioning. Now for your questions. Tamron warranties all of it lenses for 6 years. With this in mind, after getting my Canon 7D Mark II, I decided to send the Tamron in for tuning to both, the 6D, and the Mark II. I was actually satisfied with the lens, but after doing some pixel peeping, I knew it had more potential of being a even better lens. I was right. I'll match this lens with even a Canon "L" quality lens, as I did with my own 70-200mm. I use some of the prints from this lens to be printed on metal, and mount them on pieces of driftwood I find in the Bayou. I'll sell them in some local tourist shops. No, I did not send either body to Tamron for the tuning. Tamron has a deal with Canon to supply some of the body information, this was evident with the original Tamron 150-600mm lens in Canon mount. I don't own a Sigma lens, so knowing their policy about calibration is out of the question. I did own Sigma lenses a long time ago, and found quality control problems were rampant, so I stopped buying Sigma lenses. Tamron has not charged me one cent for the tuning of their lenses. My first Tamron I had tuned was my Tamron 18-270mm zoom. I use this lens fairly often and it is still sharp enough for vacation, and bayou shooting. The Tamron SP 24-70mm just came back from calibration about a week ago. I suggest people want to buy Tamron lenses, go with the SP line. All have a 6 year warranty.

B

mikedent Loc: Florida

ok, thanks for info- good to know Tamron has a close working relationship with at least Canon, hopefully also Nikon. Saves a lot of work, not having to send in the cameras themselves. (I used quote marks for the relevant part of your post I was asking about, trying to save space).

mkaplan519

I just purchased the Sigma C for Nikon. I was about to buy the Tamron last year, had my order in but hadn't received it late enough in the year that I cancelled it waiting till next year. I ended up with the Sigma because of the advantages it has over the Tamron. I have been told about the fact that they work closer with Canon/Nikon so there is not the same problems due to reverse engineering that Sigma has but since the Tamron came out last year for the Canon at least, there has been 2 times the lens would have had to been sent in for firmware updates (1st a focus problem and now a panning VC/OS problem). At least with the Sigma with the dock it would be a simple download and update. That one feature more than sold me of the Sigma over the Tamron. They are close enough in optics that one over the other really didn't make a difference. The other adjustments one is able to make with the dock also just adds to its value over the Tamron. I have it a week now, have only used it for shooting sports(a friends son at baseball) and has been excellent for me so far. No focus problems on my D810 (No MA needed). I'm happy. Waiting to be able to get out and shoot some different subjects like animals and an airshow hopefully mid-July.

dannac Loc: 60 miles SW of New Orleans

Please show some pics, if not here in the Sports Section.

mkaplan519

Here are a couple. These are reduced size and the one of him umping is a crop and reduced.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

raferrelljr Loc: CHARLOTTE, NC

Want to ask a question "Big Sky": I am at a point where I can buy either a D750 or D810. Is the 810 that much better or will I get almost everything I expect from the D750. Is the 12 megapixels that much better? Thanks. Are there complications with the 36M. New computer, new glass, etc. I'm not a Pro but am serious about good shots. Thanks.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

90 second search on google
750 vs 810 note neither is the pro model that is the D4s

In each two line pair the top is 810

Nikon D810
Nikon D750

Heavier: 34.0 oz. (965g.)
Lighter: 29.5 oz. ( 836 g.)

Wonderfully quiet
Relatively noisy

5 FPS
6.5 FPS

Idiotic Settings Banks
Easy U1 and U2 total recall settings

A pain to reset for a new shooting condition
Easy to set with its top dial

Fixed LCD
Flippy LCD

Second card is Compact Flash
Second card is SD

Have to stare at tiny top LCD when setting ISO, WB, Image Size, etc.
Lights rear LCD when setting ISO, WB, Image Size, etc.

Bigger High Eyepoint viewfinder eyepiece with shutter blind
Normal eyepiece works just as well, but I don't wear glasses.

Bottom of body around battery slot is metal.
Bottom of body around battery slot is plastic.

No Wi-Fi unless you buy and use a foolish adapter that pokes out of the body.
Wi-Fi included inside body

EN-EL15 battery rated 1,200 shots
EN-EL15 battery rated 1,230 shots

$3,300
$2,300

I shoot Canon, but if I was into Nikon I would go with the 750 and use the other $1000 for another lens.

The main reason for the 810 that I see is the extra megapixels for printing bigger baby billboards, or unless you usually forget to fill the frame and crop a lot.

dannac Loc: 60 miles SW of New Orleans

Thanks.

raferrelljr Loc: CHARLOTTE, NC

Thank you, Robert. I am leaning towards the 750. It seems that it almost can't be beat and the extra glass would be nice, either the Tamron 150-600 or Nikon 16-35. Thanks again for your oppinion.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

If you do birds, planes etc go for the Tamron 150-600 or the Sigma 150-600 C. They are within $20 of each other.

I have the Canon 6D, their equiv. of the 750. My only big problem about it is the AF system. I am almost back to the days of no AF for birds in flight and other fast moving objects. I have the Tamron 150-600 and it is a great lens for the price. From what people have posted on the hog the Sigma C and it are pretty much tied IQ wise and the Sigma has that docking station to do your own firmware upgrades and fine tuning.