Sony / Sigma / Tamron - Which 18-250 (18-270) lens is best?

[mcraige]

I've been looking at the "all in one" lenses from Sony / Sigma / Tamron, and am trying to figure out which is best. The reviews I have read seem to indicate the Sigma is better than the Tamron (quality), but nothing really compares the Sigma to the Sony. Does anyone have any experience or sources of additional information?

Until recently, they were about the same price, but today I noticed the Sigma is on sale for about $250 cheaper than the others ($649 -vs- $399). Is Sigma preparing to release a new version of the lense?

Any information is greatly appreciated.

 

[disneyfaninaz]

I"ve been looking at these too, but for a Nikon d5000. Would be interested in reading what others have to say.

 

[havoc315]

Look at dyxum.com for reviews and comparisons of Lenses for the Sony Mount.

I've heard good things about the Tamron 18-270 with the quiet internal focus drive. But personally, I stay away from all-in-ones.

 

[mom2rtk]

I have the Tamron 18-270. Not even the latest incarnation. But it's pretty decent for what it does. I also have some really nice faster lenses. I keep the Tamron around for times I don't want to be changing lenses (beach or dusty areas) or want reach past 150 (the longest 2.8 I have). It's funny, but every now and then I look at a shot I've taken and say "I must have taken this with X lens (my better one)." But low and behold, it was the Tamron.

This is one of them:


IMG_3794 by mom2rtk, on Flickr

The variable aperture certainly has its drawbacks, but when coupled with a camera that performs pretty well at higher ISOs it can be quite helpful in a kit.

The biggest complaint (beyond the variable aperture) is the lens creep that seems to be inevitable on these all in ones.

 

[SplashMo]

I would not buy one of these lenses. They will work out in bright light but on a normal day they will be too dark. You are much better off with the kit lens and the 50-250mm. Or perhaps purchase a pont and shoot with a long lens to add to the collection.

 

[Jonasphill]

I have found that Sigma doesn't have the quality that Sony or Tamron has. I shoot EOS ( mostly Canon L series) and have been pleasantly suprised with the Tamron lens 18-270 as well as the 26-75 f2.8. Based on this I would choose the Tamron.

 

[bob100]

You are much better off with the kit lens and the 50-250mm. Or perhaps purchase a pont and shoot with a long lens to add to the collection.

I would agree, the Canon 55-250IS is sharper and often on sale for $150

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

I have found that Sigma doesn't have the quality that Sony or Tamron has. I shoot EOS ( mostly Canon L series) and have been pleasantly suprised with the Tamron lens 18-270 as well as the 26-75 f2.8. Based on this I would choose the Tamron.

A few years back I may have agreed with this statement, but not today. There's probably a nickels difference between the Sigma and Tamron. Depending on the lens, one will have an advantage over the other. I won't speak to the Sony, because I haven't used any of their lenses (except in the very old days of film when I shot with a Minolta (now Sony).

 

[mom2rtk]

A few years back I may have agreed with this statement, but not today. There's probably a nickels difference between the Sigma and Tamron. Depending on the lens, one will have an advantage over the other. I won't speak to the Sony, because I haven't used any of their lenses (except in the very old days of film when I shot with a Minolta (now Sony).

I agree. I wouldn't generalize across the brand, but instead compare lens against lens.