throughrhettseyes Loc: Rowlett, TX

I shoot Nikon. Every Sigma lens I have been conned into buying is not as good as any of my Nikon lenses. Focus, ease of use, design all are inferior to Nikon. I haven't bought a Tamron but all my Nikon buddies says it's better than Sigma. I will buy the Tamron 70-200 mm f 2.8 as my next lens. It is almost as good as the Nikon 70-200mm f 2.8 for $1300.00 less. I also have my eye on the Tokina 11-16mm f 2.8 over the Nikon 10.5mm f 2.8. But, never a Sigma again.

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

Personally, I listened to the salesman's suggestions... even though I was already sold on the Nikon full frame version of the 10-24 lens (actually on Nikon it is a 12 - 24 or something like that) and the Full Frame Nikon was about $600 more... the Nikon Crop sensor was about $200 more.. The wife was buying it for me for my birthday... and the sales person said, "the designer used to work for Nikon and then went to work for Tamron. This lens is just as good or better!.." Not true.. it is "almost as good as long as you stay above 10mm on the lens. However.. the lens is a decent lens.. but I would rather have the more functional full frame Nikon version.. it is better made and has better stats. This is just my opinion after owning the Tamron. Personally, I will probably never buy another Tamron... as I tend to apply the old saying.. "Burn me once, shame on you.. burn me twice, shame on me.." Tamron and the dealer got my sale once.. and yes... the Tamron is okay as long as I keep it at 12mm or above.. but I PAID for a 10mm to 24mm lens NOT a 12mm to 24mm. The lens works okay at 10 and 11mm but it has a slight fisheye.. you notice it more as you enlarge the image. The Nikon does NOT have this defect. Are all Tamrons this way..... I don't know.. probably not.. but they had their shot with me... Now, having said that, I have never had a bad experience with Sigma lenses.. they seem to be solid and well built. I don't own any but I have used a couple of the longer lenses. I do have several Nikkor lenses (and 18-70mm DX, 70-300mm FF, 50mm FF, and an older version (not SWM) 80-400mm FF lens.. All work great and give solid results.

GreenDruid Loc: Toronto, Canada

I could say I concur. Have 2 Nikon FX bodies and both: Tamron and Sigma glass and I definitely side Sigma. Not that Tamron would be really bad. But especially Art series I really good on my D850.

IDguy Loc: Idaho

Are you looking at jpeg images, which use the camera’s firmware to adjust for distortion? If so it might work better with one lens than another, or not at at all with some lenses.

You need to be sure your comparisons are with RAW images.

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

And Consumer Reports

Nikonman44

The reviews are worth something to some folk.
I do read them and have found that they tend to be dead on and accurate.
They also get so durn techie that if I am interested I get a unit and try it, ask friends in the business that I know both brands and then use them.
No question the OEM lens should perform better but at the cost side if a Tam or Sig are so close in peerforming at 40% less and you are completely happy. GO FOR IT

Nikonman44

My option for lens other than my Nikon is the Tamron family and thats only because I have had them and still do and will buy again.

I do have a full stable of Nikons and I still use old Nikon Fs and F2s occasionally. My older Nikon zooms are still in perfect condition and are great tools.

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

I shoot and view EVERYTHING in RAW.. I only export as jpg after everything is finalized. The early (my Tamron 10-24 DX is as I mentioned a DX lens.. also it was Tamron's first release of the lens. I'm sure that they have made improvements..(they couldn't have remained the same)... but the only reason I got it was that it was a birthday gift and the wife wouldn't spring for the extra for the Nikkor (either DX or FX). It is a decent lens in all focal lengths above 11mm.. its just at 10 and 11 it has the obvious curve...barely but obvious fisheye. It does have a 5 or 6 year Tamron warranty but that doesn't include or cover the optical effect. Tamron has already "explained" that the warranty doesn't cover upgrades to optical issues. As I said, I'm sure that they make some decent lenses but I won't give them any more of my money.

woodworkerman Loc: PA to FL

I have Canon, Tamron and Sigma lenses for my Mark 5 IV and love them all.

woodworkerman Loc: PA to FL

That is 5D Mark IV. (Dyslexic typo).

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Yes, I would tend to agree with this.

..

NormanTheGr8 Loc: Racine, Wisconsin

Exactly that's why I watch All the reviews I can find comparing the lens that I feel I might purchase next and look at what other Hoggers have to say about it
before I $pend my cash to buy it and try it myself

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Exactly the same holds for OEM, if the reviewer is biased or in the pocket of a manufacturer their product will always be better than any other product. And will get a rave review. I know some hate Ken but I have actually seen him say some products sucky even from OEM.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

From information garnered at the intro to speed lights workshop by a Nikon rep, I'd say both Sigma and Tamron have a ways to go to get even close to Nikon quality. What was incredible information is that, as we know, Nikon makes its own glass. What I didn't know was that their glass is made to some 200 different recipes. The glass formulas include various amounts of various rare earth elements. These affect the optical characteristics of the lenses.

It was pointed out that if one looks at the front elements of various Nikon lenses, each of the lens models will appear different from the others. The glass various components of the lens assemblies are selected to provide the exact amount of optical correction to light passing through them so that the image is more sharply focused at the focal plane.

Since these various formulas are corporate confidential information and exclusive to Nikon, Sigma and Tamron can't and don't use them. As such, they will never equal the quality of a Nikon lens of equal focal length(s).
--Bob

Alafoto Loc: Montgomery, AL

Canon's go 'click,' cannons go 'BOOM!'