Jump to content

upgrading from kit - tamron/sigma 17-50/28-70? opinions needed


jamespjones

Recommended Posts

Hi Guys,

 

I shoot a lot of film, but I have a Canon DRebel with kit lens that I'm thinking of getting new lens for. The

kit lens is too slow, so I want to get a faster lens at a reasonable price. I have the 50mm f1.8. I'm looking

at the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 and the sigma 28-70 DG f2.8. I have an EOS film camera that I don't use

much but if I did get the sigma I believe I could use it.

 

Functionally, I have the 18-55mm range covered with the kit lens. If I'm shooting really wide I could still

use the kit. I'm concerned with image quality wide open primarily.

 

Anyone use these lenses? Any thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bueh B. - What is a "professional zooms"? Do you own or have you ever used either of the lenses in question?

 

James - I have a Tamron 17-50 2.8 and I'm very pleased. I do sell most pictures that I take, although I don't know if that makes me a professional or if that makes the Tamron a "professional" lense.

 

If you are on a budget the Tamron is a very good value, if money is not a problem and you will be using this professionally then by all means look at Canon zooms or primes. My ?2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I`m not sure about Pro lens, I`m using a Tamron 17 50 f2.8 to make a living, its quite reasoable wide open, mainly shoot people and it works well with a skylight 1a, The Sigma 24 70 I have is good to but not as sharp wide open, but lighter and smaller than the canon. If your dropping film the Tamron may suit. works fine for my purpose.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW I like using the canon 24 70 my other half finds it tooo big, and in 6 yr went through 4 sigma 15 30 from wear and tear and that only internal, whereas I`m sure the canon 16 35 would have survived long term, just did not suit my purpose. depends on how much use the lens will get and what abuse it will receive. I believe the Tamron 17 50 a better build externally than the canon 17 55, as to which would last longest who knows. my 02
Link to comment
Share on other sites

James,

 

I used to own a sigma 28-70 2.8 and used it for a little over a year. In terms of value for

money, the lens delivers because you'd be hard pressed to find another constant 2.8 at the

24-70 range at that price (got it in Dec 05 for less than USD400). Five negatives though:

 

1) a little soft wide open for my taste. Didn't bother me then until I upgraded to the canon

24-70 and got to compare IQ.

 

2) the first thing you'll notice will be the focusing motor. The lens doesn't come with USM

(i think sigma calls it HSM) and it gets pretty loud. It sounds like the motor on your 18-55

but 10 times louder, like a dentist's drill. The noise can actually fool you into thinking that

the lens focuses faster than it really does but I've found that its canon counterpart focuses

match faster, specially in low light. If I remember right, there also seems to be a long lag

from the time you half press to the time the motor wakes up.

 

3) I had my sigma fail after 11 months of use. The aperture blades began to stick when

shooting stopped down so I was forced to shoot at 2.8 all the time so the blades didn't

have to move. Had it fixed by the local rep which replaced the step-up motor? at least

that's what they said. Could have been just a bad copy...

 

4) the lens is well built and the matte black rubber coating is handsome... until it starts

turning gray and peeling. Some say the gray is due to the natural salts on your hands that

adheres to the rubber coat but I don't see that happening on my canons. The peeling

rubber... well its like human skin peeling after too much sun only that the lens body

doesn't grow new skin.

 

5) I used to get green colored flare in some of my photos whenever there's a strong light

source, with or without the hood on. Never figured out why and just accepted that fact

after hearing similar comments from other sigma owners.

 

But don't think that the sigma is all bad. It does take sharp images when stopped down

and like I said earlier, this is an affordable 2.8 so it won't break the bank like the canon

24-70 would. Plus its also light weight and makes for a good walkaround so it also won't

break your neck, again like the canon.

 

- pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote><i>What is a "professional zooms"?

</i></blockquote><p>

 

Canon's top-of-line, <abbr title="Ultrasonic Motor">USM</abbr>-equipped, L-build, constant aperture zooms (which may or may not feature <abbr title="Image Stabilization">IS</abbr>). While other manufacturers like Sigma, Tamron, Tokina etc. make some very nice and best of all affordable lenses, they do not carter to the high-end market segment and almost always are second to what Canon has to offer.

<p>

If wide open image quality is the most important factor for the original poster, I would advise against third-party zooms. If he wants a good compromise between image quality, zoom versatility and cost, these lenses are nice, but he has to be aware of the drawbacks (e.g., see Pete's posting).

 

I am not saying that using Tamrons/Tokinas/Sigmas makes you less of an pro and will not sell pictures, but if you are "concerned" about sharpness/contrast etc wide open, you may find them disappointing (though they are definitively a step up from the kit zoom which is a great value for the money, by the way). And what's the use of having a "fast" f/2.8 lens when everyone is recommending to stop it down because it is "soft" wide open?

<p>

I agree that pro zooms are pretty heavy which makes them undesirable in a way, and that's why I also recommend to take a look at prime lenses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to give an idea how soft these lenses are, I just grabbed a shot from the nights work couple nights ago, may not have picked the sharpest part were 2 in shot so DOF considered. Taken 2nd high jpeg 1/40sec f3.2 17 50 f2.8 Tamrom @ 25mm there is not much difference at 2.8 I don`t PP and this looks fine printed may improve with USM but this is at 300%. Sigma 24 70 EX DG Macro f2.8 about same. bit better than kitlens HTH
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Guys,

 

Just a follow-up. Picked up the Tamron. Debated a slightly less expensive Promaster

(supposely the same lens as the Tamron w/ a lifetime warranty), but opted for the

namebrand (offbrand?).

 

Used it the same day for a shoot. It allowed me to do what I wanted to be able to do.

Good amount of light in a dark room, sharp photos. I ended up needing the added wide

angle over the 28-70. Shot some with strobes at f4.5 but looking at the results, I think

this still beats the kit and was worth it. The constant aperture over the entire zoom range

was the key. Using manual flash ratios, didn't need to worry about the F changing over

the zoom range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...