Lens Choice - Sigma or Tamron (Page 2): I have both as well as Nikon. On another thread here I heard it discussed that Tamron was only good as a door stop. This has not been my...

Dr. Danny Winbush Loc: On the beach

I have both as well as Nikon. On another thread here I heard it discussed that Tamron was only good as a door stop. This has not been my experience. I have 18 -200 that I have used on both my Nikon D80 and D300 with satisfactory results. Guess it depends on the individual experience.

Dr. Danny Winbush Loc: On the beach

My Sigma is a 170 - 500. A little loud and slow for my D300 but works ok. I need to get some filters for it though. As a side note, I could only use it in manual mode on my D80. The D80 did not have the energy to use it in auto mode for much time at all.

jimberton Loc: Michigan's Upper Peninsula

Dr. Danny Winbush wrote:

I have both as well as Nikon. On another thread here I heard it discussed that Tamron was only good as a door stop. This has not been my experience. I have 18 -200 that I have used on both my Nikon D80 and D300 with satisfactory results. Guess it depends on the individual experience.

i have had tamron lenses and they are fine.

the "elite" brand group on this forum....only buys the same brand as their camera and of course they are better because they say so.
it must be a heavy load on the shoulders being perfect.

i say buy what you can afford and works the best for you.

if tamron lenses were doorstops, i don't think they would be in business....same with sigma, tokina, etc....

i wouldn't trade my sigma for the canon brand. i had the canon brand it was not superior.

best thing is to take your camera body to the local camera store and try the lens before you buy....and buy what works great for you, not what you are reading by some elitist.

user1437

for the birds hahahaha

user1437

120-400

user1437

18-250 sigma on a moving harley wanted to see how the lenses worked. the one I panned our shadow offthe freeway

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

dtrumb wrote:

for the birds hahahaha

I love to watch big birds landing and taking off. The best are the swans. They put on a great show.

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

Although I have not had experiences with these particular models, I have had both Tamron and Sigma in their 28-70mm F/2.8 models.

I found the Sigma sharper, but also much heavier. An issue when on a twelve hour wedding coverage. The Tamron quality was very good, but had problems with it's build. It had a lock to prevent the zoom from moving out when pointing the lens in a downward angle, which broke several times and was expensive to have repaired. Also the Tamron had focussing issues in low light conditions.

Have upgraded to all Canon "L" lenses now and ended all issues.

If weight is an issue I would check the weights of both models before making a decision.

Hope that helps.

Newfie-1 Loc: Ontario-Canada

ProfJoe wrote:

I am considering either the Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or the Sigma 17-50 2.8OS for my Nikon D7000. Most reviews I have read seem to lean towards the Sigma. Any advice?

Sigma,Tamron, do yourself a favor and get the Nikon for your Nikon D7000, and you don't need the stablizer, you'll love it. You are only going this way once so go big...

pixbyjnjphotos Loc: Apache Junction,AZ

I purchased the Tamron 17-50 F2.8 with VC one month after they were released. I use it on my NIKON D80. What a wonderful combo. I would put the super sharp pictures up against those taken with almost any other lens that costs less than $1000. I couldn't be happier with any lens. Fast focus, great color, super sharp photos throughout entire aperature range. My only con is that 50mm sometimes is not quite enough. Here is a pix straight out of the camera. It has not been touched by computer software. Of course you must make your own decision.

Cactus at Phoenix Botannical Gardens

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

ProfJoe wrote:

I am considering either the Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or the Sigma 17-50 2.8OS for my Nikon D7000. Most reviews I have read seem to lean towards the Sigma. Any advice?

Try slrgear.com.

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

Pretty sure my next lens is going to be the Tamron non-vc 17-50. Researched quite a bit and tests seem to indicate better overall results with the Tammy. I remain unconvinced cost for the VC is warranted for this focal length lens of any brand.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Like I said earlier, I just got the Sigma 17-70 and am very impressed so far. I am not a big proponent for OS, but the 17-70 is capable of 1:2.7 macro @70 and for that I do see an advantage for OS - handheld of course. So,if your lens is capable of macro at longer focal lengths and you intend on using it there , then OS/IS has a definite application.

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

NO matter what question you ask about camera equipment, you will always get different opinions from diffferent people. Ultimately it is YOU who will have to purchase it with your own hard earned money and use it. Your answer lies within YOU, buy what feels good to operate in your hands and with ease of use....you are the one that has to enjoy using it :) .

Dr. Danny Winbush Loc: On the beach

sirlensalot wrote:

Pretty sure my next lens is going to be the Tamron non-vc 17-50. Researched quite a bit and tests seem to indicate better overall results with the Tammy. I remain unconvinced cost for the VC is warranted for this focal length lens of any brand.

sirlensalot, I have a photo on one of my websites, zinfocus.us, that I took with the 18 - 200 Tamron. It is an image of breaking waves at the shoreline. Had it mounted on my D300 and thought it did a great job. If you care to look the image is in the gallery that has an image of a Cafe sign with a cardboard cutout of Elvis in the window. Click on it and you will find the wave image I call summer foam close to the bottom.