charlie_deruiter Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 I am still trying to make a decision. Both of these seem good but how do they compare optically and in speed? I will be using this for pre-wedding photos and post-wedding before the reception. I want a zoom so I can use it for both portraits and photojournalism. Things happen so quickly at a wedding. I think I will get an 18-125 f3.5-5.6 for receptions because I really do need more of a zoom there. Does anyone know anything about these lenses beside what the manufacturer?s website says. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erik_pettersson Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 Sweden's largest photo magazine have tested both and find them both to be excellent. Also it might be worth mentioning that they aren't as generous with their ratings as popphoto - an excellent rating actually means that the lens is much better than many other lenses. Being more or less optically the same, it boils down to price and range. The tamron is a bit cheaper and functions more like a portrait lens, while the Sigma costs more and functions more like a general zoom (covering both wide and tele). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fivetonsflax Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 I like the Sigma better, solely for intangible reasons -- I like the way the images look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 <p> These lenses do not replace each other because of the vast difference in focal lengths, especially in the wide end. For weddings I think that the wide end availability is more important than the tele end so, from these two, I'd get the 18-50/2.8. That said, I'd rather have the 17-40/4 over the 18-50/2.8. </p> <p> 1. I'd get USM. As "Things happen so quickly at a wedding", you need fast AF motor. Unfortunately, the 18-50/2.8 does not have HSM. <br> 2. I'd get a bit wider. As I said above, on cropped DSLRs every MM counts. <br> 3. I'd be free from the fear of possible <a href="http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html#compatibilitythirdparty">future incompatibility problems</a>. </p> <p>I'd lose 1 stop but that can easily be rectified by changing ISO. </p> <p>Happy shooting, <br> Yakim.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie_deruiter Posted May 23, 2005 Author Share Posted May 23, 2005 That's great! Do you know anything about the Sigma 18-125 or anywhere that I might be able to read some practical testing of it? Thanks Erik. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie_deruiter Posted May 23, 2005 Author Share Posted May 23, 2005 I didn't see the other responses. Sory guys. What would you recommend Yakim. I'm willing to look at other things at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_nelson1 Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 I just shot a wedding this weekend with a 20D and the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. Overall I found it to be an excellent lens for the purpose. It's true there were some situations, e.g.,some of the "table" shots at the reception, where I would have wanted more width. But there were more cases, such as during the service itself, where I was grateful for the 75 so I could get good shots without being too physically close. I would go with the Tamron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted_sorensen1 Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 Is this a one-wedding shoot or do you expect to shoot wedding regularly? If it is a one-time thing, then can you easily rent in your area? Personally, I would rent a Canon 24-70 f/2.8L for the wedding and then after buy a more affordable lens that suits my needs (including for things other than weddings). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie_deruiter Posted May 23, 2005 Author Share Posted May 23, 2005 I book 2 weddings a month, after that I turn them down. I need all the advice becasue I am a med. format user with a Canon SLR 35mm for receptions and catch shots, I had the 24-70L but it was defective & did not like the weight, I also have the 50 1.8, & 85 1.8 by Canon, along with an awful super zoom. I always want tons of information and opinions before I buy anything. So this is my job & those are the lenses I want info on. Offer what you may. :o) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie_deruiter Posted May 23, 2005 Author Share Posted May 23, 2005 Oh yeah, I also shoot a couple of portraits (mainly in nature occasionally with a background) during the week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted_sorensen1 Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 OK, then I see why you are considering the 28-75 f2.8 Tamron or 18-50 f2.8 Sigma. I don't have either so I can't give a lot of advice... other than I have been looking at those two models myself. I have also been considering the new Sigma 24-60 F/2.8 EX DG as well and I suggest you also seek opinions on that model. It is about the same size as the Tamron 28-75 F/2.8 and only slightly more expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie y. Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 "I'd lose 1 stop but that can easily be rectified by changing ISO" I never understood this reasoning to be valid. The advantage of bumping up the ISO can also be applied to the 1-stop faster lens (your statement implies that it can't), which would make the 2.8 lens even more useful. ISO adjustments are an equal advantage to ALL lenses, so how does this negate the advantage of the f2.8 lens over the f4 lens? If that was the case, then one can use the same reasoning in preferring a f5.6 lens over an f4 lens because the slowness "can easily be rectified by changing ISO". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknagel Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 I went through a few bad copies of the Tamron 28-75/2.8 before I found a very sharp one. I spoke with Tamron service department several times and sent one in. Anyway I also bought the Sigma 18-50/2.8 and quickly got rid of the 28-75mm. The short time I had both side by side, my opinion, I thought the sigma focused faster, had nicer color, and feels better built. I thought the photos from the Tamron were orange looking. Both were equally sharp. For indoor use I really like the wide end of the Sigma. Since you have the 50/1.8 and 85/1.8, seems you may want to cover the 18-50mm range. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erik_pettersson Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 Charlie - I'd have to agree with the above poster; use the 85mm (=135mm on 20D) for outdoor portraits for great bokeh and sharpness. Use the 18-50 sigma for rest. I haven't bought at www.sigma4less.com myself, but they offer good prices. Check them out at www.resellerratings.com. The swedish photo magazine also tested the 18-125 sigma, and found it to be alright (not excellent like the 18-50). They said the lens performed well wide open at 50mm, but that it needed to be stopped down between 18-28 and 85-125 for optimal sharpness. They were particularly disappointed with the tele side of the zoom. Erik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisjb Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 Hi Charlie, I know its an issue with some here, but we are shooting film weddings at present with the Sigma 24 70 2.8 macro, It is sharp and doing a great job. the ef24 70 2.8L is far too heavy for my partner. The extra 4mm at wide end is quite more than expected. With the digital I prefer 18 50 good luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericpetersonphoto Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 I have the 28-75 Tamron and really like it! I also have the Canon 10-22 Ef-s lens. This seems like a good combo to me. I own the 17-40 L and use it a lot. Tough question. You might also consider getting the Cheapo 18-55 kit lens. I have it but only used it one time. Good luck. You can never have enough Eric Petersons giving you advice;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 For weddings you need at least two bodies (you MUST have a back-up body) and at least one flash. One could be with 17-40/4 and the other with the Tamron 28-75/2.8. Flash could be 420EX but for heavy use the 580EX might prove more useful (e.g. when you want to bounce and the ceiling is high). Another recommended lens is the 85/1.8 for outdoor portraits. Finally, the best advice I have for you is to buy nothing and go work with someone as an apprentice for several months. First, you'll be using his tools and will not need to spend money. Second, you'll gain valuable experience of what to do and what not to do. As someone who did it once I can tell you that there is a lot to know except from basic photography skills and have the right equipment. Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie_deruiter Posted May 25, 2005 Author Share Posted May 25, 2005 Thanks everyone for all the opinions. Add some more if you think of anything or find anything. Thanks Yakim for the advice, but I've had my own business for a couple of years and am training assistants because of all the weddings I have had to turn down this year. I am just thinking about switching from the med. format world and will be definitly leaving the 35mm behind for digital. Also, I always have back up cameras and flashes at weddings, so don't worry. You guys are great! Thanks for all the input. :o) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie_deruiter Posted May 25, 2005 Author Share Posted May 25, 2005 Oh, does anyone know of a lense that covers about the same range as the 18-125. I have to have the wide end for tight spots and I really need the tele too. I like how my bride's are always amazed at the pictures I get. The most comman response is "How did you manage to capture everything?" I don't want that to stop. ;o) Speed, optics and range. Give me what you got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie_deruiter Posted August 30, 2010 Author Share Posted August 30, 2010 <p>I did buy the Tamron 28-75/2.8 lens 5 years ago. I still love the lens. It is my one of my favorites. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now