Which lens, two to pick from

[Josh125]

It will go on a xti. They are priced comparable and both get great reviews, very sharp lenses.

Tamron 28-75/f2.8
Sigma 17-70/f2.8

This will be an all purpose lens as you might have guesses by the specs. I'm leaning towards teh tamron.....what say you Dis :surfweb:

[Furgus]

Funny I am looking at the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8.

Anyone have that lens?

[MICKEY88]

which would be better for your type of shooting, the extra on the wide angle end or on the long end..

[Steve's Girl]

I think the Sigma 17-70 is a f2.8-4. I looked at that lens once and seem to recall that it was not 2.8 through the whole range.

[Josh125]

I think the Sigma 17-70 is a f2.8-4. I looked at that lens once and seem to recall that it was not 2.8 through the whole range.

Excellent point, no I believe it is 2.8-4 or so. I guess this is another check in the Tamron side.

[fitzperry]

I got the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 for my Nikon D70 a couple of months ago and have been very pleased with it. It's considerably sharper than my kit lens (Nikon 18-70), and the colors it produces seem truer as well.

I agree with MICKEY88 that you should consider where you're willing to give up some range. IIRC Sigma and Tamron both make some fairly well regarded f/2.8 zooms in the 18-50 or 55 range, so if you need the wide end and want f/2.8 throughout you might look at some of those. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a reasonably priced, fast (2.8) lens that covers the entire range of my kit lens. I went with the 28-75 because I wanted that reach on my "walk around" lens, and I'm considering adding a wide angle zoom (maybe the Sigma 10-20) to my collection.

If you have any filters, you might take that into consideration as well. The Tamron is 67mm, which is the same size as my kit lens so the cp I bought last summer fits.

Furgus, I considered the Sigma 24-70 too but went with the Tamron because IIRC the reviews were slightly better and there are a couple of regulars on this board who have that lens (Groucho maybe and someone else?) and recommended it.

[Miss Kelly]

The Tamron is a fantastic lens, especially if you get a sharp copy. :)

[Furgus]

I guess I did not think about the Tamron because of the 70-300 I have, but that is on the low end. I might look at this a little bit more. And B&H has a $10 rebate right now on that bring it down to $369.

[fitzperry]

I guess I did not think about the Tamron because of the 70-300 I have, but that is on the low end. I might look at this a little bit more. And B&H has a $10 rebate right now on that bring it down to $369.

IMO it's a very good lens for the money. At first I was reluctant to start buying third party lenses, but I really prefer fast glass, and at this point in time I can't justify spending $1,200+ for a comparable Nikon/Nikkor (I'll just keep telling myself that it can't be that much better :rolleyes: ).

[Furgus]

IMO it's a very good lens for the money. At first I was reluctant to start buying third party lenses, but I really prefer fast glass, and at this point in time I can't justify spending $1,200+ for a comparable Nikon/Nikkor (I'll just keep telling myself that it can't be that much better :rolleyes: ).


I am in the same boat as you. Right now I want the fast glass, heck even more so then VR, but I can not afford to spend thousands of dollars on it. Most of the glass from Sigma, Tamron and any other third part lens manufactures probably goes to Canon and Nikon also.....anyone know that? That would be a neat little fact to know.
Anyways, with the new baby coming in Feb, I and not really concerned about long focal lengths because, well, he/she will not be moving to much :) By the time he/she can skate or run, I will be forking out the cash for the Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 VR, but until then, Sigma, Tamron and others that are very comparable quality wise on my D50, will get looked at well before the Nikkors.

[jann1033]

since this started with a canon i figure i can ask this;) ..i know oblio has said in the past the sigma pro line( don't remember the exact name) is good...i'm in the same boat as you nikonians...no money but would like a faster zoom. i'm happy with the range on my 28-135 IS( and the sharpness in general )but not the speed( 3.5-5.6) but then again hate to lose the range and if really bugs me to have a soft lens, drives me crazy like. so has anyone compared any of the mentioned lenses to a nikon or canon l type lens...just wondering how much of a difference in sharpness, build quality i would expect to be less and really don't mind that for the price

[Josh125]

I've been doing a bit more research and it truely looks like the tamron is a better piece. The build quality seems to be a key point as many people have had issues with the sigma AF sticking with use. Also, I've noted the tamron has a factory 6 year warrenty which is a great selling point. I'll be hitting up B&H tonight :) We leave on the 29th, so I get to figure this lens out before then.

Another toy, like I need one :rotfl2:

[Anewman]

This summer I was in the exact same boat, I compared the Tamron and Sigma(24-70).I actually borrowed fairly new copies of both lenses and did my own "controlled tests".

Sigma= I really wanted to pick this lens, it really is built to L lens standards. It was just not as sharp wide open when compared to the Tamron, it also seems to hunt for focus more(at all apertures) and sometimes would just be OFF by a little. When it was right on it was as sharp as any L lens I have seen but when wide open it was just not as sharp as the tamron.

Tamron= After handling the Sigma I was sure that I would not like this lens, it felt like a consumer lens. But I never noticed it hunt for focus under same conditions where the Sigma did, it is also quieter. And this one is actually VERY usable wide open, and is also very sharp throughout the aperture range.

To me it came down to being able to use F/2.8 confidently, yes I would have preferred to get a lens that was built like a tank but the build of the Tamron is actually better than most lenses in this price range($340).

... really bugs me to have a soft lens, drives me crazy like. so has anyone compared any of the mentioned lenses to a nikon or canon l type lens...just wondering how much of a difference in sharpness, build quality i would expect to be less and really don't mind that for the price

Jann I did not compare to the Canon lenses, but that was on purpose. If I had I am sure that i would not like the Tamron as much as I do. Kinda like test Driving a BENZ and then buying a Camry. Both good cars just not in the same class. So I test drove the ACCORD AND CAMRY, I just felt it was more apples to apples.

As for the Tamron I feel that it is very sharp and decently fast, but Build quality is not great. It is kinda like a heavy plasticy build, maybe even a bit below that of you 28-135IS. But no it is not a flimsy lens, like those cheap consumer level lenses or most kit lenses.

The build quality seems to be a key point as many people have had issues with the sigma AF sticking with use. Also, I've noted the tamron has a factory 6 year warrenty which is a great selling point.

Josh when my Tamron was a few weeks old I had a 20D setup with the lens on a TRIPOD and my wife decided to see what the quik release on the head was for... YUP down goes the camera onto the hard wood floor landing straight with the lens taking all of the force.

TAMRON did not need to fix the lens because it was not a DEFECT, it was abuse. but when I went to their local authorized service center, the man told me that since it was so new that Tamron authorized him to do the repairs under warranty. I was impressed and all I paid was a $54 fee to get a rush on the repair(was leaving town) and the lens was ready in a day or two.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v646/Manobeer/_MG_2690.jpg

[Furgus]

Could you please post some images from the Tamron that you took? I am curious to see some. I guess I could look at Flickr too.


Thanks for the great reviews BTW

[Anewman]

Could you please post some images from the Tamron that you took? I am curious to see some. I guess I could look at Flickr too.


Thanks for the great reviews BTW


Here are some after the repair, I dont have many online right now.
Full Image then crop(for the first shots)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v646/Manobeer/Fullimage.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v646/Manobeer/crop.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v646/Manobeer/Fullsize.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v646/Manobeer/Crop-1.jpg


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v646/Manobeer/monorail.jpg

Now some from the sidelines(wide open at 2.8)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v646/Manobeer/_MG_4397.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v646/Manobeer/_MG_4662.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v646/Manobeer/_MG_3230.jpg

[Furgus]

Wow! That seems very sharp to me. I may have to look into this lens much harder now.

Thanks for the pics, they area all great!

[fitzperry]

I don't have many on-line either, but here are a couple I've taken with the Tamron . . . . I'm sure mine will sell you on it if Newman's didn't. :rotfl2:

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e391/fitzperry/DSC_0005.jpg

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e391/fitzperry/DSC_0265.jpg

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e391/fitzperry/DSC_0077.jpg

[DragonSlyr]

Funny I am looking at the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8.

Anyone have that lens?

I have had mine for about a year on my Canon 20d. Bought it needing a fast lens for DD's gymnastics. It is now my primary walk around lens. I have been really happy with it. Just returned from Disney last week. Got some really good shots of the castle lights with it. Only shortfall is occasional close-ups not being able to get wide enough.

Tom

[Groucho]

From what I've read, the Tamron is sharper than the Sigma and weighs a good bit less. What's not to like? :teeth:

If you want some examples, most of my Disneyland 2007 photos in my gallery (linked in my sig) came from my Tamron 28-75mm in Pentax mount. It's no prime, but it's quite good.

28mm, F3.2:
http://www.totalsham.com/pics/gallery/4254-4/2007DL-167.jpg

28mm, F6.3: (not Disneyland, obviously :) )
http://www.totalsham.com/pics/gallery/4798-4/PoSteam07-10.jpg

75mm, F7.1:
http://www.totalsham.com/pics/gallery/3983-4/2007DL-118.jpg

75mm, F6.3:
http://www.totalsham.com/pics/gallery/4226-4/2007DL-160.jpg

75mm, F4.5
http://www.totalsham.com/pics/gallery/4302-4/2007DL-179.jpg

[jann1033]

i've never had a tamron..maybe the next lens i get will be one;) great photos everyone

[Furgus]

yeah I think I am sold on the Tamron.....now to call my local camera store to see if they have one :)

[sbell111]

... Josh when my Tamron was a few weeks old I had a 20D setup with the lens on a TRIPOD and my wife decided to see what the quik release on the head was for... YUP down goes the camera onto the hard wood floor landing straight with the lens taking all of the force. ...It's a good thing that you have the 20d. A rebel's plastic body might not have survived that fall.

[kewlby]

I have the XTi and Tamron 28-250mm combination. I bought it in September to take photos of my kids' soccer games and for my recent trip to WDW. I'm still relatively new to dslr but I thought I'd add my thoughts.


I love the compactness of the Tamron lens.
This combination is easy to carry around and light.
I've taken some great photos. PM me if you want to see my recent WDW pics
There was a learning curve for me to learn to take nice action photos and get just the right exposure.


I recommend the xti and tamron combination. :thumbsup2

[Josh125]

I ended up getting the Tamron. It should be here the day after Christmas and more importantly 3 days before we leave for the world :thumbsup2

[Groucho]

One thing I forgot to mention that's a negative about the Tamron - that lousy lens cap! I always fumble taking it off and even more putting it back on.

Also, the lens hood makes it a little tricky to adjust a polarizer. I usually end up popping off the hood then putting it back after adjusting. I'd prefer a little window on the bottom like some other lens hoods, that you can stick your finger in to adjust.

[Furgus]

One thing I forgot to mention that's a negative about the Tamron - that lousy lens cap! I always fumble taking it off and even more putting it back on.

Also, the lens hood makes it a little tricky to adjust a polarizer. I usually end up popping off the hood then putting it back after adjusting. I'd prefer a little window on the bottom like some other lens hoods, that you can stick your finger in to adjust.

You don't have the Sigma 10-20, do ya?? WORST LENS CAP EVER.....

I had to go buy the Nikon 77mm cap just so I would keep one on it. It was horrible. If I end up getting the Tamron, a good lens cap is cheap ;)

[fitzperry]

One thing I forgot to mention that's a negative about the Tamron - that lousy lens cap! I always fumble taking it off and even more putting it back on.

Also, the lens hood makes it a little tricky to adjust a polarizer. I usually end up popping off the hood then putting it back after adjusting. I'd prefer a little window on the bottom like some other lens hoods, that you can stick your finger in to adjust.

Totally agree about that cheapo lens cap.

I've never seen a hood with the little window to adjust a polarizer. Can you buy those to fit different lenses? I've only used a polarizer with my Nikon kit lens; it's a real pain to adjust with the hood on. I've been wondering if I'm missing something and there's a better way.

[gokenin]

Totally agree about that cheapo lens cap.

I've never seen a hood with the little window to adjust a polarizer. Can you buy those to fit different lenses? I've only used a polarizer with my Nikon kit lens; it's a real pain to adjust with the hood on. I've been wondering if I'm missing something and there's a better way.

I know that the lens hoods that come with pentax lenses have a window that you can open that allows you to adjust a polarizer without having to take the hood off but the tamron and the sigma lenses that i have do not have these so it may only be a pentax thing:confused3

[Groucho]

Like Gokenin said... it seems to be fairly common on Pentax lens hoods, though I'm sure it's not 100% unique to them. It's really, really handy - and there's a plastic piece you can leave in if you want to shoot portrait in sun without light leakage (the window's on the bottom of the lens cap normally, so would be on the side in portrait mode.)

To be fair, it's not on all of theirs - I recently got a lens hood for the 50mm F1.4 lens and there's no window. But it's a square filter (and not very deep) so it should be easy to reach in and rotate the polarizer.