18-50mm lenses

[Ratpack]

Just wondering if anyone has experience with either of these lenses. I am looking to get a fast zoom for general photos both at Disney and everywhere else. Not sure if I should go with a wider range in the 28-70 or the lower focal point in the 18-50. I have a nikon 18-135 so all ranges are covered already, I would just like to get a faster lens with a zoom.

Thanks!

[Steve's Girl]

I have been looking at these lenses as well. I believe the Sigma is 24-70 and the Tamron is 28-75. I would primarily use it for indoor/no flash shots. Looking at my EXIF data, I find that I do not take many wide angle shots indoors. So, I pretty much ruled out the 18-50. Also thought the extra reach may come in handy for Disney stuff such as Lion King show, etc.

[allyn]

i have the sigma 18-50 f/2.8. i generally like it. of course i wish it was longer at the telephoto end but i bought it for the aperture not the zoom. i use it as my walk-around lens and keep it on the camera most of the time.

[DVC Jen]

I have the Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8-4 but I also have a Canon. I really like the lens. Easy to focus, not so large it is like carrying a lead weight around your neck and my pics with it are sharp.

[DragonSlyr]

I have the Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8. Originally I purchased it for taking high speed indoor sports without a flash. I find myself using this lens the most. Very compact, decent focal range and sharp pictures.

[Ratpack]

I have the Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8-4 but I also have a Canon. I really like the lens. Easy to focus, not so large it is like carrying a lead weight around your neck and my pics with it are sharp.

Jen,
Were the photos from your trip to WDW this year done with the Sigma 28-70? I have resurrected my thoughts og getting one of these lenses.

[Anewman]

I tested the sigma 24-70mm but ended up buying the Tamron 28-75mm, maybe I got a bad copy but the Tamron just seemed so much sharper wide open. Stopped down a bit the sigma was amazing and the build quality is pro level(imo), but I was not buying a lens for build quality I needed something to actually shoot at 2.8.

[Ratpack]

I tested the sigma 24-70mm but ended up buying the Tamron 28-75mm, maybe I got a bad copy but the Tamron just seemed so much sharper wide open. Stopped down a bit the sigma was amazing and the build quality is pro level(imo), but I was not buying a lens for build quality I needed something to actually shoot at 2.8.

Do you have any samples of shots from the Tamron? This is my other choice.

Thanks!!

[Anewman]

Do you have any samples of shots from the Tamron? This is my other choice.

Thanks!!

I did not have any wide open shots online, so I put up the first one I found. The wife with my 15 year old son.

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

But that is only a 100% crop, here is the full image, my 17 year old daughter was being grumpy that day.

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

Not great pictures, I just redid my computers with VISTA and I am having trouble getting everything calibrated. Online images look washed out, in photoshop they look too contrasty.

[Groucho]

I have the Tamron 28-75mm F2.8... my understanding (having done modest but not thorough research) is that the Tamron is sharpest, the Tokina has the best build quality, and the Sigma is somewhere inbetween.

Here's some sample shots from a recent "Pageant of Steam" event we went to. My lens is the Pentax mount but optics should be identical no matter which mount it has.

28mm, F6.3, 1/160th, ISO 200
http://www.totalsham.com/pics/main.php/d/13801-4/PoSteam07-10.jpg

28mm, F2.8, 1/60th, ISO 800
http://www.totalsham.com/pics/main.php/d/13921-4/PoSteam07-34.jpg

33mm, F2.8, 1/30th, ISO 800 (it was getting pretty dark, though you can't tell by looking at the photo)
http://www.totalsham.com/pics/main.php/d/13976-4/PoSteam07-45.jpg

Here's a decent bokeh shot... and even some Disney content, my son's wearing his WDW "How To Be a Pirate" t-shirt. :teeth: 28mm, F2.8, 1/40th, ISO 800.
http://www.totalsham.com/pics/main.php/d/13901-4/PoSteam07-30.jpg

Overall I'm pretty happy with the lens. It doesn't always blow me away with the sharpness like a prime can, but it's certainly capable of delivering good results for a zoom.

[DVC Jen]

Jen,
Were the photos from your trip to WDW this year done with the Sigma 28-70? I have resurrected my thoughts og getting one of these lenses.

I'm sorry I just saw this - no they were not. Most of the photos taken from our June trip were taken with my canon 28-135 IS lens.

I recently took these to frame for my dh for his birthday - he wanted some new photos to hang in the new office he is moving into tomorrow. I love the lens. It IS so easy to focus and fast enough that I don't really worry too much about camera shake with it when I am hand holding.

http://jenniferd.smugmug.com/photos/184815575-M.jpg

http://jenniferd.smugmug.com/photos/184815616-M.jpg

http://jenniferd.smugmug.com/photos/184815639-M.jpg

http://jenniferd.smugmug.com/photos/184815708-M.jpg

[Groucho]

In a somewhat unrelated note... Looking back at the photos I posted, it might be worth noting that the first shot was taken through a circular polarizer, hence the nice blue sky. The others weren't, as it was getting dark and I wanted all the light I could get, so they got the more typical whitish sky. I'm glad I picked up that CP!

[DVC Jen]

I did not have any wide open shots online, so I put up the first one I found. The wife with my 15 year old son.

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

But that is only a 100% crop, here is the full image, my 17 year old daughter was being grumpy that day.

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

Not great pictures, I just redid my computers with VISTA and I am having trouble getting everything calibrated. Online images look washed out, in photoshop they look too contrasty.

Your wife looks like she is FREEZING! :)

[Shutterbug]

Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro

and the

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical

Right now I am leaning toward the Sigma because it zooms the same way as the canon lens'. Also it zooms smoother than the Tamron.

I have read all the other reviews from other sites..was wondering if anyone else here as an experience with them.

[DizzyV6P]

Flip a coin.

I have the Tamron 17-50. It's tack sharp and a great lens. I also have its big brother the 28-75 f/2.8 as well. It's living its life in a bag right now ever since the 17-50.

Zoom? Didn't make a difference to me. They both felt good to me when I tested both. I went w/ the Tamron because I wanted the extra 1mm and I knew it was tack sharp just like its big brother. Many folks on POTN split about 50/50 on those lenses so you can't go wrong with either one.

Like I said....if all else fails, flip a coin.

[Shutterbug]

Flip a coin.

I have the Tamron 17-50. It's tack sharp and a great lens. I also have its big brother the 28-75 f/2.8 as well. It's living its life in a bag right now ever since the 17-50.

Zoom? Didn't make a difference to me. They both felt good to me when I tested both. I went w/ the Tamron because I wanted the extra 1mm and I knew it was tack sharp just like its big brother. Many folks on POTN split about 50/50 on those lenses so you can't go wrong with either one.

Like I said....if all else fails, flip a coin.


Thanks for the input...down at the local camera shop the Tamron is about 50 more. So that may also figure into it some.

[Shutterbug]

Update....I got the Tamron.
I actually had gone in with full intentions of buying the Sigma.
Reasons for the Sigma was it zoomed the same direction as Canon lens's.
Its motor also was quieter.
I brought a focus test chart with me to check them out. They had two of the Sigma lens's in stock. Both of them had front focusing problems!

The Tamron on the other hand was focusing just like its supposed to be. So thats what I ended up getting :thumbsup2

[bnorm27]

First, let me say that I definitely do not have the cash for the Canon equivalent of this lens. I just purchased a Canon 70-200 f2.8L, so my photo budget cannot support another big purchase. So, I was wondering if any of the Dis'ers on here have either one of these lenses, and what they think about them. I have read the comments on B&H, and on a few other photo boards. What do you guys think?

[JimbobJimbo]

I have the Tamron 17-50 f2.8, and I think that it is a great lens. I used it pretty much exclusively during our last trip to WDW. Here are a few examples from that trip with the Tamron lens on a Canon Rebel XSi.

http://hinkel.smugmug.com/photos/401414388_FCMB3-L.jpg

http://hinkel.smugmug.com/photos/401546052_aYecX-L.jpg

[jfinke]

I don't own either. But from what I have read, the Tamron is a nice lens. I don't know if the IS on the canon (plus name) is worth the extra $400+.

What is driving the purchase? My feelings is if it is for Disney, you could probably get away with a slower lens with IS. If you are trying to catch fast moving objects, then go with the fast lens.

That was my thinking when I picked the 70-200 f/4 IS over the 2.8 non IS. Plus the size and weight that I did not want to carry around while traveling.

[bnorm27]

First off, Jimbobjimbo, great pics. You may have just sold the lens for Tamron! Plus, I like the Tamron 6 year warranty vs. the 3 year Sigma. I have another Tamron lens, and am very happy with it.

Jfinke, I agree that the extra $$$ for IS or for a Canon equivalent in general is not worth it. I like the faster lenses. Since I purchased my 70-200 f2.8 I am spoiled. I want more 2.8! The purchase is for much more then just Disney.

[jfinke]

Well, it really comes down to what you want to shoot, etc. :)

Do you have the nifty fifty yet? Maybe a smaller prime? But, most of them seem to be prestty expensive.

The f/4 is my first L lens, and it has spoiled me as far as being quiet and quick.

[bnorm27]

I do have the nifty fifty. That is my second favorite after my 70-200 f2.8.

[jfinke]

I hate to keep pointing out this guy, but I believe he is competent as far as Canon equipment goes.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-17-50mm-f-2.8-XR-Di-II-Lens-Review.aspx

Also, may want to check out these two threads:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=331860

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=209580

[DizzyV6P]

I have the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 It's my bread and butter lens for everything now.

Most of the recent pics on my photo site was made w/ the Tamron....except for the wedding. That was my crappy Olympus 790....being a groomsman prevented me from carrying my dslr around :(

http://rwcphotography.zenfolio.com/

[jfinke]

Did you ever make a decision? I am looking at the tamron now.

[broberts]

Does anyone have the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8? I am thinking about getting this lens. I was debating between it and the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, but I think the extra 6mm might come in handy. Not to mention that the 18-50 is with the HSM and the 24-70 that I am looking at would be the non-HSM model. Any preferences of one over the other?

Such a quandary.


Thanks in advance.

[Photoguy]

I'm looking at buying a Tamron 17-50, and I find I usually shoot everything with a pretty wide angle so for me the extra 6mm would be a big deal. My last camera was a Canon S3 IS with a 12x optical zoom (I think it was 12). I specifically bought the camera for the zoom and then realized I was shooting everything with a wide angle anyway. So it really comes down to how you shoot. I have read many positive reviews of the 18-50 though.

[NostalgicDad]

Does anyone have the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8? I am thinking about getting this lens. I was debating between it and the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, but I think the extra 6mm might come in handy. Not to mention that the 18-50 is with the HSM and the 24-70 that I am looking at would be the non-HSM model. Any preferences of one over the other?

Such a quandary.


Thanks in advance.


I've had the Siggy 18-50 f/2.8 for more than 2 years now. It's easily my most used lens for regular outings. I've been quite pleased with the quality and sharpness of my copy. I did have to send it in for repair late last year but their warranty service was top notch and I had it back in 7 days, and in better shape than when I sent it in. I say you will not be disappointed with it. :thumbsup2

[broberts]

Thanks for the responses. I went ahead and ordered the Sigma. They seem to be pretty close and for $379, it was hard to beat.

[Tnkrbelle565]

HI

I'm looking to purchase a new lens before our next trip. My Nifty Fifty (1.8)met it's demise at DHS :scared1:

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg269/ksc565/Aisling%20Bday%20Trip/DHS/300.jpg

Yup, didn't smash. It popped right open!

I was originally going to just get the same lens again because I do use it frequently and obviously need it for low light situations. But I'm wondering if it's worth it to trade the aperature opening for something with a little more range.

Any thoughts (besides NOT dropping my lens again- at least it wasn't the Tokina 11-16 rental I had!!!)

[Frantasmic]

I am about to purchase the Tamron lens.

I have been researching for 4-5 months. I settled on this after viewing pictures posted at the Canon forums for each lens. I was almost convinced to get the Canon 24mm f2.8 as it provides sharp pictures, but everyone seems to be out of it right now.

[Tnkrbelle565]

I am about to purchase the Tamron lens.

I have been researching for 4-5 months. I settled on this after viewing pictures posted at the Canon forums for each lens. I was almost convinced to get the Canon 24mm f2.8 as it provides sharp pictures, but everyone seems to be out of it right now.

Any links to the pics you've seen??? Thanks

[aeryn]

I have the Tamron 17-50 for my Canon 40D and I love it. I also have the nifty 50 and for walking around the parks, I generally use the Tamron.

On the other hand, I just got a Canon 10-22 and it hasn't been off my camera in a month :) It may be my new favorite walkaround...

[Shutterbug]

I went into the camera store to buy the Sigma but left with the Tamron and here is why:

They had 3(I think) of the Sigma. During my focus test, they all had front or back focusing issues. Another words each of this Sigma lens had either focused to the front or the back of where I was pointing the lens.
Even the camera store owner agreed and said he was going to call Sigma about them.

The Tamron they had focused spot on. The test pics I took were very sharp.

The only thing I didnt like about the Tamron was that it zooms in and out opposite of what the regular Canon lens do.

You turn it clockwise to zoom in. Canons turn counter clockwise. I get confused when I switch back and forth often between the Tamron and my Canon 70-200. Though its worth it because of the Tarmon's sharp pics.

[Tnkrbelle565]

Thanks all!!! Keep the advice coming!!!!! :thumbsup2

[Frantasmic]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=209580

Here's nearly 4 years worth of photos with the Tamron (non-VC).

[jann1033]

the tamron is great. sharp and imo very useful. i probably use it most of all my lenses

[Tnkrbelle565]

Thanks again! and thanks for the links Frantasmic!

Do most people find that this lens is a useful walk-around lens? I really want a new lens that will fit this purpose but bottom line, at WDW, you need a relatively fast lens when there are so many low light situations. I had a fantastic experience renting the Tokina last trip but I'm paranoid to rent again after the boo boo :rolleyes:

[bob100]

Thanks again! and thanks for the links Frantasmic!

Do most people find that this lens is a useful walk-around lens? I really want a new lens that will fit this purpose but bottom line, at WDW, you need a relatively fast lens when there are so many low light situations. I had a fantastic experience renting the Tokina last trip but I'm paranoid to rent again after the boo boo :rolleyes:

I use a Tamron 17-50 2.8 (non-vc) for a "walk around" lens. I think it's better than the 18-55IS kit lens.

[Wingman]

I have liked my Tamron since I bought it, the only question was the length, so I picked up the Tamron 28-75 to see which I prefer and ended up keeping both of them.

I don't think you can go wrong with the Tamron, although I have never used the Sigma.

I still think you will need the 1.8 that comes with the 50 as well.

[Tnkrbelle565]

I still think you will need the 1.8 that comes with the 50 as well.



So what you are saying is that I should buy them both ;)

[Tnkrbelle565]

any other opinions???

[AndrewWG]

Well, I pulled the trigger on this lens finally. Only had it for a day now but so far I like it. I will say that the focus motor is louder than what I am used to. Louder than any Sigma or Canon lens that I own. The images seem to be great though. I will take some more later on and get a real good feel for it.

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w148/AndyG1970/IMG_3180.jpg

[Tnkrbelle565]

Well, I pulled the trigger on this lens finally. Only had it for a day now but so far I like it. I will say that the focus motor is louder than what I am used to. Louder than any Sigma or Canon lens that I own. The images seem to be great though. I will take some more later on and get a real good feel for it.

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w148/AndyG1970/IMG_3180.jpg

Thank...since you live near me...did you find the best price on Amazon?

[AndrewWG]

Thank...since you live near me...did you find the best price on Amazon?

Yep. That is really the only place I go for camera gear. I don't shop around too much. Usually, Amazon uses prices from quite a few dealers to determine the price you will pay. In this case, I got it direct from Amazon, but have had stuff ship from Adorama and other places with my Amazon orders before. Have never had a problem and the price is usually right in line with everyone else. I'm sure that with extensive shopping around, I could find it cheaper, BUT I would caution against anyone who finds prices that seem TOO cheap and from dealers they have never heard of.

[Tnkrbelle565]

Yep. That is really the only place I go for camera gear. I don't shop around too much. Usually, Amazon uses prices from quite a few dealers to determine the price you will pay. In this case, I got it direct from Amazon, but have had stuff ship from Adorama and other places with my Amazon orders before. Have never had a problem and the price is usually right in line with everyone else. I'm sure that with extensive shopping around, I could find it cheaper, BUT I would caution against anyone who finds prices that seem TOO cheap and from dealers they have never heard of.

Thanks. I always order my camera stuff from Amazon but figured that I would double check ;)