PDA

View Full Version : Sigma lens vs. Tamron lens



boog
03-23-2005, 06:24 PM
I've been getting really good advice from you guys. Thanks for your time. My next question involves lens. I want a lens at 28-300mm. I read about the sigma lens and tamron. The tamron has an XR lens and now an XR Di lens. I know Di is for digital but is the difference in price between the two models worth it? Also, same queston about sigma. Which lens is better? Are they exactly the same or personal preference? Thanks again for your time.

Harry
02-27-2006, 11:50 AM
I to am looking to buy a 28-300mm lens for my Nikon D70s and I don't know which one to buy. Should I buy it on the internet or local. It looks like you can save $50 to $100 on the lens buting on the internet.
Harry

D70FAN
02-27-2006, 01:17 PM
The Sigma 28-300 is not as good at 300mm as the 70-300.
, and is quite soft from center and about average at the edges.

coldrain
02-27-2006, 01:54 PM
This from the 70-300 George mentioned:

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/images/LensesMtf/111_big.gif

D70FAN
02-27-2006, 02:06 PM
The Sigma 70-300 APO DG Macro, shows much better sharpness at the center and then slowly falling off to the edges, at 300mm and also has 1:2 macro capability. Anything past about 15mm image height has no relevance on APS-C sized sensors.

Another advantage of APS-C sensors versus full frame 35mm is better edge sharpness, and brightness, using standard (non digital only) lenses.

I can live with a little extra weight and size to get a better image from most full-frame based lenses.

If you look at the MTF charts for digital lenses they usually stop at 15mm image height. So when comparing digital specific lenses to full-frame always pay attention to the base scale.

coldrain
02-27-2006, 02:07 PM
These lenses are compromises, and you can not expect stellar results from them. If for some reason you do want a lens like this, then try to form an opinion by reading the user experiences at www.photographyreview.com .

D70FAN
02-27-2006, 03:28 PM
These lenses are compromises, and you can not expect stellar results from them. If for some reason you do want a lens like this, then try to form an opinion by reading the user experiences at www.photographyreview.com .

Steller results are relative, as are user experiences. Most of the people claiming to be professionals or "experts" may, or may not, be and either way, probably have no clue as to what may work on camera A versus Camera B.

Canon users will complain frequently about focus speed and accuracy using third party lenses, which may not be a problem with other brands. But someone reading the review will think that all cameras have that problem with that lens. At the same time you will have people comparing a $1200 lens to a $400 lens, without stating that minor difference.

It's really too bad that photozone doesn't have more 3rd party reviews, as they actually take the time to run multiple resolution tests, as well as vignetting, and CA analysis. A much better source of information, in most cases, than someones subjective opinion. They are primarily a Canon house, and sometimes give the benefit of the doubt to Canon lenses, but the comparitive measurements tell the story.

I will agree that in most cases you get what you pay for, but every once in a while you get much more. The Sigma 70-300 APO DG Macro is one of those lenses.

Alnath
02-27-2006, 05:36 PM
My Sigma 18-125mm DC was ok

My Tamron 24-135mm SP is stella