Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    9

    Sigma 50-500mm vs Tamron 200-500mm

    This may be a little soon, but has anyone had a chance to compare these lenses? I'll be using them on a 20D.

    Thanks

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Monterey Bay
    Posts
    5,986
    Quote Originally Posted by hkrautter
    This may be a little soon, but has anyone had a chance to compare these lenses? I'll be using them on a 20D.

    Thanks
    The Sigma has received very good write-ups, and is popular with the nature and even sports photography crowd. A little less wow goes to the Tamron, but still a lot cheaper than a 500mm prime. I have not used either one, but from what I've seen and read, the Sigma 50-500 is very nice.

    If it were my money the 50-500 would be my choice. here are a couple of reviews:

    http://www.lonestardigital.com/Sigma_50-500.htm

    http://www.photo.net/equipment/tamron/200_500_Di/
    D7000, D70, CP990, CP900, FE.
    50mm f/1.8, Sigma 18-125, Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, Nikon 18-105 VR, Nikon 55-200 VR, Nikon 43-86 f/3.5 AiS, Vivitar 28-90 F/2.8-3.5 Macro, Vivitar 75-205 F/3.8-4.8, SB800.
    Ha! See, I can change...


    http://d70fan.smugmug.com/

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,175
    Such a lens actually exists? Does it take decent pictures? I'd imagine this being a huge hulking thing to lug around though.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Monterey Bay
    Posts
    5,986
    Quote Originally Posted by Rex914
    Such a lens actually exists? Does it take decent pictures? I'd imagine this being a huge hulking thing to lug around though.
    If you are talking about the 50mm-500mm Sigma or the 200mm-500mm Tamron... Yes they do..

    Pictures I've seen from the Sigma are very nice. Read the reviews.

    If you are a nature or sports photographer these are pretty compact. And with the crop factor equal 750mm tele on the long end and 75 or 300 on the short end. At 3 pounds they aren't bad compared to some of the fixed focus 500's out there.

    Like the guy on Lonestar said, think of it as a 500mm lens with the ability to zoom in to 50mm.
    Last edited by D70FAN; 02-12-2005 at 08:42 AM.
    D7000, D70, CP990, CP900, FE.
    50mm f/1.8, Sigma 18-125, Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, Nikon 18-105 VR, Nikon 55-200 VR, Nikon 43-86 f/3.5 AiS, Vivitar 28-90 F/2.8-3.5 Macro, Vivitar 75-205 F/3.8-4.8, SB800.
    Ha! See, I can change...


    http://d70fan.smugmug.com/

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    9

    reviews

    George the lens reviews were a big help. Looks like the Sigma is a little sharper than the Tamron. Thanks for the URLs.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Hattiesburg, MS
    Posts
    33
    I've been looking at these as well. It appears that the primary advantage of the Sigma is that it focuses faster. On the other hand, the Tamron is lighter in weight. They both look like decent choices, and I'm having a heck of a time deciding.
    Canon 20D
    Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC
    Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS
    Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
    Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
    Manfrotto 3021BPRO; Kirk BH-1 ballhead

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    152
    It depends what you're going to use it for. I find that the ability to shoot from 50mm all the way up to 500mm is extemely useful.

    500mm@f8


  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    8,163
    Cropped, resized, and added just a hint of sharpening. Otherwise out of the camera:



    Sigma 50-500mm @ 50mm, f/5, 1/250, ISO100. Taken a couple hrs ago.

    It's not L glass but it's close
    Last edited by cdifoto; 08-04-2005 at 09:36 AM.
    Ouch.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    3,109
    cdi - your camera's looking good!
    Canon A720 IS, 40D w/ BG-E2N, 28 1.8, 50 1.4, Sigma 70 2.8 macro, 17-40 F4 L, 24-105 F4 L IS, 70-200 F4 L IS, 430 EX, Kenko 2X TC & Ext Tubes, AB strobes and more...
    View my photo galleries here: imageevent.com/24peter

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,807
    has anyone looked at the sigma 80-400 OS? i would assume that the shorter range would result in sharper images and better contrast compared to the 50-500. if not, and if you don't need the extra reach, you'd gain stabilization at such a long focal length. the canon 300L f4 IS (around $1000/$1100) + 1.4x extender or the 400L f5.6 would probably blow the other two away.
    Last edited by ReF; 08-04-2005 at 06:23 PM.
    canon 17-40 L, 70-200 f2.8 L, 400 f5.6 L, 50 f1.4 & f1.8, 1.4x TC, sigma 15 f2.8 fisheye, flash 500 DG Super, kenko extension tubes

    note to self: don't participate in sad, silly threads unless you're looking for sad, silly responses.

    "anti-BS filter" (from andy): http://dcresource.com/forums/showpos...94&postcount=4

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •