Disney Information Station Logo

Go Back   The DIS Discussion Forums - DISboards.com > Just for Fun > Photography Board
Find Hotel Specials & DIScounts
 
facebooktwitterpinterestgoogle plusyoutubeDIS UpdatesDIS email updates
Register Chat FAQ Tickers Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read





Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 08-15-2012, 07:24 AM   #1
NateNLogansDad
Still Wish'n
 
NateNLogansDad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Glenolden PA (DelCO)
Posts: 2,741

Need some help picking a lens. sigma/tamron 17-50

So I'm thinking of diving into the wonderful world of 2.8 lenses but I'm pretty torn on what would give me the best bang for the buck. After reading some of Tom's Blog a while back, I had my eye on.....

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...0mm_f_2_8.html

But after a little web browsing, I keep reading about the same lens without the VC and how it's supposed to be a much sharper lens.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._XR_Di_II.html


So I have come to you, my dis friends in search for some opinions that actually matter. What would you do? Sacrifice the VC for a higher IQ? Opt for the stabilization? Go with a different manufacturer like Sigma?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/689623-REG/Sigma_583306_17_50mm_F2_8_EX_DC.html


Or just sell my camera and take up golf again?

Thanks guys. I have a little bit of time to make up my mind but it's starting to stress me out!
NateNLogansDad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2012, 07:42 AM   #2
HPS3
Disney Fanatic
 
HPS3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Slidell,La
Posts: 1,776

I can vouch for the Sigma. It's really sharp and the stabilization works great.
HPS3 is offline   Reply With Quote
|
The DIS
Register to remove

Join Date: 1997
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,000,000
Old 08-15-2012, 09:07 AM   #3
Shutterbug
Baba Ganoush is my hero
No parking baby, No parking on the dance floor
 
Shutterbug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 5,686

I have the Tamron and it has been a real good lens. Very sharp. I had originally planned to buy the Sigma but every one I tried out at the camera shop either front focused or back focused. The Tamron was dead on so thats what I ended up with.
Shutterbug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2012, 09:48 AM   #4
mom2rtk
DIS Veteran
 
mom2rtk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 29,936

I shoot Canon and ended up with the more expensive Canon version for all the reasons listed so far. Tamron is supposd to be sharper, but lost some of that sharpness when they added the VC. I had a hard time reconciling that in my mind since the reason I was upgrading from my kit lens was to gain in the IQ department.

So I decided I'd go with the non-VC version. Many on here just raved about the sharness of their non-VC Tamron. Then I heard the focus motor. It was annoyingly loud. I'm not sure if that's the case on the Nikon version as well, or if they have made any improvements since I researched, but be sure to listen to it on youtube or in a camera shop before you buy.
mom2rtk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2012, 11:00 AM   #5
photo_chick
Knows a little about a lot of things, a lot about nothing.
 
photo_chick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: in the middle of Dallas/Fort Worth
Posts: 4,921

From what I've seen the non-VC Tamron is sharper than the Sigma. For me and what I'd use it for I'd give up the VC for sharpness. Unless I could find a way to swing the Canon because like mom2rtk pointed out, it leaves the others in the dust with it's L quality glass and great build quality. But that's me, and not you.
__________________
Danielle

photo_chick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2012, 11:06 AM   #6
nbaresejr
Mouseketeer
 
nbaresejr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 300

I had this decision about 2 months ago. I decided on the Sigma because the Canon was about $500 more then the Sigma and the Sigma is sharper then the Tamron (all the reviews say). IS, OS or VC was a must for me so i never considered the non VC Tamron.

I did have to return my 1st copy because it didnt work but like i said the $500 difference made that a non issue. Also Sigma has a 4 year warranty so any issues can be dealt with through them.

Take a look at my flickr. All almost all my Europe phots were shot with the Sigma 17-50 2.8
__________________
Visits: Every Summer as a kid up until the age of 16
Adult Visits: April 07- Wilderness Lodge, April 2008- Wilderness Lodge, July 2010 Disneyland, Dec 2010- CBR,, Oct 2011 CBR, April 2013 CBR, Nov 2014 CBR, Oct 2015 CBR
http://www.flickr.com/photos/57234495@N03/

Gear- Canon 6d, Canon 24-70 F/4 IS, Canon 70-200 F/ IS, Canon 430 EXii
nbaresejr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2012, 07:56 PM   #7
NateNLogansDad
Still Wish'n
 
NateNLogansDad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Glenolden PA (DelCO)
Posts: 2,741

Quote:
Originally Posted by mom2rtk View Post
I shoot Canon and ended up with the more expensive Canon version for all the reasons listed so far. Tamron is supposd to be sharper, but lost some of that sharpness when they added the VC. I had a hard time reconciling that in my mind since the reason I was upgrading from my kit lens was to gain in the IQ department.

So I decided I'd go with the non-VC version. Many on here just raved about the sharness of their non-VC Tamron. Then I heard the focus motor. It was annoyingly loud. I'm not sure if that's the case on the Nikon version as well, or if they have made any improvements since I researched, but be sure to listen to it on youtube or in a camera shop before you buy.
I looked it up on Youtube and holy crap!!! That would drive me insane every time I touched the shutter! I never even thought about looking on youtube for things like that! Thanks soooo much
NateNLogansDad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2012, 08:03 PM   #8
HPS3
Disney Fanatic
 
HPS3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Slidell,La
Posts: 1,776

The Sigma is an outstanding lens. I have never had a problem with Front/Back focusing. Sigma is very good with their warranty service.

The Sigma has the HSM motor so it focuses really fast and near silent.
HPS3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2012, 08:44 PM   #9
mom2rtk
DIS Veteran
 
mom2rtk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 29,936

Quote:
Originally Posted by NateNLogansDad View Post
I looked it up on Youtube and holy crap!!! That would drive me insane every time I touched the shutter! I never even thought about looking on youtube for things like that! Thanks soooo much
Someone pointed me to youtube when I was considering that lens. My mind was made up the minute I heard it.

In the end, I just couldn't get past all the glowing references for the Canon lens. I know you don't shoot Canon, but I can't emphasize enough how happy I am to have an awesome walkaround lens. You're not spending this money to increase reach, but to increase IQ. So to me it had to really make a big difference. I've had my Canon now for over 2 years, so the extra it cost is a distant memory. And I don't regret it.

I will say that Sigma does seem to have a reputation for front or back focusing. I had a marked issue with my Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 so I sent it in for calibration. They were great to work with and got it back to me quickly.

Good luck with your decision!
mom2rtk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2012, 11:53 AM   #10
Shutterbug
Baba Ganoush is my hero
No parking baby, No parking on the dance floor
 
Shutterbug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 5,686

Quote:
Originally Posted by NateNLogansDad View Post
I looked it up on Youtube and holy crap!!! That would drive me insane every time I touched the shutter! I never even thought about looking on youtube for things like that! Thanks soooo much
I really dont notice the noise and my ears pick up things like that.
Only time I think its noticeable is when its really hunting back and forth in a totally quiet surroundings. Outside, I really dont notice it at all.
Shutterbug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2012, 06:16 AM   #11
bob100
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,020

Quote:
Originally Posted by NateNLogansDad View Post
So I'm thinking of diving into the wonderful world of 2.8 lenses but I'm pretty torn on what would give me the best bang for the buck. After reading some of Tom's Blog a while back, I had my eye on.....

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...0mm_f_2_8.html

But after a little web browsing, I keep reading about the same lens without the VC and how it's supposed to be a much sharper lens.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._XR_Di_II.html


So I have come to you, my dis friends in search for some opinions that actually matter. What would you do? Sacrifice the VC for a higher IQ? Opt for the stabilization? Go with a different manufacturer like Sigma?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/689623-REG/Sigma_583306_17_50mm_F2_8_EX_DC.html


Or just sell my camera and take up golf again?

Thanks guys. I have a little bit of time to make up my mind but it's starting to stress me out!

you read good things about the Tamron non-vc because it's sharper wide open (f2.8) than the other zooms
see www.photozone.de
or
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...0&LensComp=398

But if I was buying an f2.8 zoom for a crop model and had a budget of $700 I would seriously look at the Sigma 17-50 2.8 HSM OS EX
bob100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

facebooktwitterpinterestgoogle plusyoutubeDIS Updates
GET OUR DIS UPDATES DELIVERED BY EMAIL



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:33 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Copyright © 1997-2014, Werner Technologies, LLC. All Rights Reserved.