Sigma 70 - 200 f/2.8 vs. Tamron 70 - 200 f/2.8

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by jose_rivera|9, Jul 16, 2008.

  1. Just purchased the Sigma after a long debate about saving up for the Nikon (business has been slow). Saw the tamron for $700 and thought it was a great deal. Read up on and other places. But when I tested it the colors were a bit off (for my taste). The Sigma was much better ($100 more). I shoot with the D80 and D300 and found the Sigma worked much better. Of course the Nikon would be perfect. Now for the question... Would you choose the Sigma or the Tamron? Why?
  2. Since you state the Sigma was better, why would you even question what choice to make? Isn't it obvious? FWIW, you can probably adjust the camera's settings to get pretty much identical colors between the two lenses.
  3. Thanks for positng this. I had heard elsewhere in the Net that the Tamron had better IQ, so there may be some sample variation going on here. If I were testing the two, I'd rack them out to 200mm, f2.8 shoot from a tripod and study corner sharpness and chromatic aberations. Then I'd play around with the autofocus an various dynamic situations and try to get a sense of their differences. BTW, how do you compare handling between the two. Mostly with respect to the zoom ring location, size and feel. Thanks,,,
  4. I have a friend who shoots all sports indoor and outdoor, band, and show chior. He uses the Sigma 70-200 on a Canon. Here is his site if you want to study the quality of the pictures.
  5. ".....Saw the tamron for $700 and thought it was a great deal. Read up on and other places. But when I tested it the colors were a bit off (for my taste)." I don't think so with my copy. Great colors and sharpness. You may want to take a look at my new Tamron 70-200 (Nikon mount): Have funs!
  6. Justin, nice pictures.
  7. Color and sharpness: the Tamron at f2.8 ,hand-held,no editing, on my D80 : Speed of micro-motor AF: These shots I took oncoming 60 mph trucks' side panels, on the highway, through a side tinted -window of my van, ( was at 60mph too, that means 120 mph moving objects).Were the AF Tamron fast enough?. You can download them in full size:
  8. I just made that decision and opted for the Sigma II. Not for any reason really, either would have suited my needs, it's just the Sigma presented itself for a reasonable price in like new condition. I am very pleased with the Sigma. Optically, mechanically, and aesthetically.
  9. In testing the two lenses the Tamron felt good on the D300 because it was slightly lighter than the Sigma but the colors where off. I loved the fact that the AF switch was very simple to use but had enough tension that it wouldn't be too easily changed. I really wanted to see how others felt. I saw Justin's photos and thought that would be the quality out of the box. But like he said, it might have the copy of the lense. Sigma is a heavy lense and I will try to attach a large file photo from the Bronx Zoo.
  10. The Monarch butterfly shot was handheld in a slightly crowded butterfly garden.
  11. Dan, As for the handling... The Tamron felt lighter but not flimsy. The Sigma zoom ring responded and didn't creep when I aimed downard. The autofocus was lightning quick in both bright light and indoors. The Tamron's autofocus was loud (I could hear it). Could not use it for weddings (do mostly Catholic Weddings). The Sigma was silent. I still have to test the sigma in terms of tracking objects (my children) but I think it will do fine.
  12. Jose, I see the photo is quite soft, and focus looks not very accurate, sorry. I think you might have not enough time in the store to test the Tamron lens. (I usualy take at least 100 pictures before I decide to keep or return a lens, you know.) And maybe you don't get a good copy of the Sigma or because of the hand shakes. Quality control is a big issue of the third party lenses, however Tamron maybe little better.( I returned 2 Sigma copies of 18-50 2.8 before because they were too soft, and just sold my Tamron 28-75 even it's well-know. I thought I ended my journey with 3rd party companies but when I got this Tam,it brought me back . The optic of this Tamron is even much much better the 28-75. Why don't you try a copy of the Tamron then compare the 2 lenses,side by side, then decide to keep which one is better?You will not lost anything. I would reccomend to order it from Crutchfield if you are in the US,and if the lenses are in stock, as I did order mine 3 weeks ago. I had a greatest ordering experience that I ever had although I ordered many electronics equipments from a lot reputable stores like Adorama, B&H, Beach camera, Amazon, BuyDig..... I ordered my Tam on Sat night, then they shipped it on Sunday noon by UPS, then received it on Tue. They have live chat, phone, emails responses were very quick. Great experience!!! They are an authorized Tamron dealer in US as well, will allow you to return the lens within 30 days ( B& H has only 2 weeks and have to pay both shipping ways, I did return them 3 times) with prepaid shipping labels sent by the company if you don't like, no questions, free shiping in both ways .... I think 30 days is long enough for you to test/evaluate the lens and make the decision. The price is the same, at $699. About the weight: I think my Tam is not bad at all. It's lightest in the class. I carried the lens in 4 hours in the zoo and it did'n hurt my hands and neck. I put off the collar at home when I don't need the tripod, and it balanced very well on my D80. I also like the built of Tam. Not any part rotating or moving outside when the lens focuses. The AF/MF is very easy to switch. I have never wasted my time to test and review anything on the web until I got this lens. So you may think it's special. It's worth. I were in hard decision when I decided to get an 70-200 2.8 too. Good luck.
  13. jose, not a great example of a shot. the butterfly isn't in focus. this could be user error, not a characeristic of the lens. can you post another shot? justin, your tamron shots look great! very convincing testament to lenses' IQ. the side of a van is a big target, tho' focus seems accurate. how does it do with a smaller, fast-moving object? i wouldn't mind seeing some more shots of moving objects, got anything tracking people in action shots? and have you noticed any softness at 135mm as DPReview stated happened w/ this lens? realize this is kind of nitpicky but if the tamron is capable of shots like yours, it appears to merit serious consideration. (as an aside, how does it do in the corners at 200mm on a D3? just kidding)
  14. Thanks, Eric. I have not tried on the small moving objects like birds, sport people yet. I will do it sometime when I have a chance, thanks for your helpful advice.(I have came into DSLR for just 6 months, you know). Even IF the AF is not fast enough for small moving objects, I'm still happy though because I mostly shoot portraits, landscapes, wildlife, people....So the IQ is likely more important to me.But believe me, I have not noticed any problem with the AF yet. This lens produces great portraits of my son too. ( but sorry I can not bring my family portraits to public). I understand why this lens is in-stock then out-stock very fast. Happy that i got one.
  15. Justin, you are right on. I was not in good shooting position with the butterfly. It was a little croweded in the Butterfly zone. Here is a better shot.
  16. Eric, Here is a shot of a black footed penguin swimming by.
  17. Here is one I was able to get outside where it wasn't so crowded.
  18. I have the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 and I just love it! Optically, it is a bit sharper than Sigma's lens, and I don't mind the slightly gear-shifting-like change from manual to automatic focus. Will get the Sigma 150-500 to complement, though, ASAP!
    I would recommend either lens to people who like to photograph nature, or sports, specially those who hasn't a lot of cash lying around.
    Alternative to the Sigma is the Tamron 200-500, but I've heard so much good about the Sigma, so I decided to change brand :)!

Share This Page