jak86094

I bought Tamron's 70-200 mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 to use with my Nikon D500 because the OEM version is much more expensive and because I don't use this lens very much...finding it perfect for event photography, portraits, etc. It's lightweight (compared to the Nikon 200-500 I use most often for wildlife photography), bright, and sharp. The quality, uses and frequency of use made the Tamron an attractive and satisfying alternative to the OEM version, especially with the difference in price.

lookingglass18

I just spoke with the Tamron rep yesterday about their 17-28 mm lens for the Sony a7 series. He told me 2 things that are relevant here: (1) Tamron makes lenses for multiple other companies that then put their own brand name on them, (2) Tamron worked with Sony to build this and their 28-75 mm e-mount lens ‘from the ground up’, that is they worked with Sony to build it the way Sony does. The Tamron lens is $900, the Sony is $2200.

Orson Burleigh Loc: Annapolis, Maryland, USA

I have two Sigma lenses, a 4.5mm f/2.8 DC HSM Circular Fisheye Lens for Canon APSC and an 8mm f/3.5 EX DG Circular Fisheye Lens for Canon full frame. Both were purchased as used lenses; neither has an equivalent among Canon's OEM offerings.

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

"The Sigma autofocus 15-30mm f3.5-4.5 EX Aspherical DG DF lens provides focal lengths from 15mm ultra-wide angle to 30mm wide-angle and is the first of its kind in the world. This lens has minimum focusing distance of 11.8 inches (30 cm) at all focal lengths with 110.5 degrees (wide) to 71.6 degrees (tele) of angle of view."

A used full frame autofocus wide angle zoom lens that can also be used from less than a foot way for about $200.

First shot is wide angle 17mm on an FX sensor.
Second shot is close up 30mm on a DX sensor.

Click on "Download" to see a larger and much sharper image.

(Download)


(Download)

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I did not even know about that lens, just skimmed over a review on it, it looks like a really great value. I have the 12-24 EX DG, before Canon came out with their 11-24mm it was the widest full frame zoom you could buy, I still have it because it is wide enough to use as an ultra wide on a crop camera and just stupid wide on a full frame. Image quality is good too, but before Canon came out with their 11-24 there was nothing on the market that would come close to the angle of view of the Sigma.

https://www.opticallimits.com/Reviews/311-sigma-af-15-30mm-f35-45-ex-dg-lab-test-report--review

Bill 45

Bobspez: Nice pictures, so don't take this the wrong way. I can to the exact same thing with a Pentax K-1000 with a Sears Mod. No. 202 7368300 (that 60 - 300mm lens with Macro). The Pentax came from a local auction. The lens came from a yard sales.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Interesting Bill, I am wondering how it is that you would find an equivalency between an untrawide zoom to a telephoto zoom.

johnhjacobs

IMHO, in general, OEM auto focus will probably out perform 3rd party auto focus. Usually OEM sharpness is better than 3rd party but this has many exceptions. I have quite a few 3rd party specially lenses (Sigma Art, Tamron 150-600mm, Tilt shift, macro, etc.) that perform very well for much lower prices than similar OEM glass. On my mirrorless camera I typically like manual focus prime lenses and there is no OEM glass that comes close (sharpness, color rendition, micro contract) to my Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f1.4 or 40mm f1.2 lenses. I also like to shoot with vintage lenses which can produce dramatic effects. For example, try Googling for images from a Helios 85mm f1.5. This lens is not sharp, the color rendition is marginal, but nothing can isolate the subject and make swirly bokeh like it can. The glass that I keep on a camera (D850) most of the time is an OEM Nikkor 240120mm f4; I do this because it is a great general purpose lens to grab spontaneous shots in almost all conditions. My other 3rd party lenses get used when I know what type of shooting I plan to be doing in advance. My Z6 travels with a Nokton 58mm most of the time and a selection of other focal lengths in the carry bag. So, people buy 3rd party lenses for a variety of reasons and cost is a major factor. However, there are some amazing and unique 3rd party lenses. If you are shooting with a mirrorless consider trying some vintage manual prime lenses and readily available mount adaptors. They are quite inexpensive and there are lots of different type to choose from. There are lots of YouTube videos to watch and get ideas.

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

I agree with the review. And it's a big solid lens.

(Download)

nikonnate Loc: Woodbury MN

If there's one thing clear to me, it's that shopping around while paying off other bills has its benefits. The comparisons between 24-70 lenses by fstoppers was really good and solidified for me which one I'll be getting, but on some of the more oddball stuff (ex. really good astro lenses) it's clear that third party is the way to go - Sigma's 20mm 1.4 Art is easily my top choice, followed by the 14mm 1.8 or 24mm 1.4. Then we start looking at the 35mm 1.4, either Sigma or OEM (frankly I haven't decided between them yet).

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

Bill, I'm sure the macro would do just as well but how can you get the wide angle yard shot with a 60mm lens (unless you are shooting a vertical panorama)? Mine was shot at 17mm with a full frame camera and I was at the back of my yard.

Bill 45

All I am saying is that I can do the same thing with second hand or third hand camera and lens.

Bill P

I guess used third party lenses still beat out used OEM lenses cost wise.

I understand that Tamron and Sigma lenses are popular. Just curious as to why?[/quote]

I have known many people who have great pride in their ability to search out and buy what they perceive as a bargain. And really, the difference in aftermarket lenses and OEM can be very subtle. That said, I've bought two aftermarket lenses in my life and both were absolute dogs. I learned my lesson.

But I understand the new Sigma lenses are sometimes better that their oem equivalents. For whatever reason, Sigma, which used to produce trash, has really turned around.

Bill 45

You did not said you were using wide angle lens, in that case I have a 24mm second hand lens that I pick 40+ years ago that can do that.

gmango85

If you ever purchased a Vivitar 80-200 in the early 70's you would understand.