Sigma 17-70 or Tamron 17-50

[jasonsmith894]

This is a follow-up to my last post, which has now left me thouroughly

confused. I mostly shoot landscape photos, and I'm looking for something to

take with me on a trip to India to compliment my sigma 10-20 (which is the lens

I primarily use). The Tamaron seems to be sharper, but I don't often shoot at

f2.8, but maybe I will if I do street photography. Anyway, any thought on which

of these I should get would be greatly appreciated.

[Matt Laur]

Jason: do you have anything else that can get you past 50mm? That extra 20mm, out to 70, definitely provides you with a few more options, street-wise. Especially with people, that longer reach is really helpful. 2.8, by the way, is sure useful, both creatively as well as in practical terms for some circumstances. But if you're used to that 10-20, you'll really have to learn to wrestle with the shallow DoF that comes with 2.8 out past 40 or so mm. Sorry, no practical experience with either lens, but I know that when I'm shooting with my 18-200 or my 70-200, I spend a lot of time in the 50-100 neighborhood. Good luck!

[michaelschrag]

Both lenses are reviewed/tested here: http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html

 

Both lenses have user reviews here: http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/

 

look at those sites and then you make the call.

[juanjo_viagran]

How about Tokina 16-50mm ATX pro 2.8 !?

 

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tokina_1650_28_nikon/index.htm

 

That's the one I'd get..

[elliot1]

If you are going to be using the lens primarily for shooting in daylight or with flash, the 18-135 would be a perfect compliment to your 10-20. It is lightweight, offers a really nice zoom range, gives very sharp images, beautiful colors and contrast and is fully compatible with your camera.

[bram_de_mooij]

If you buy the Tamron, be sure to get the Japan assembled version,not the early China assembled version.

Some complaints about overexposure are known with the last one.

[jasonsmith894]

Thank you all for the responses. After much deliberation, I decided to go with the tamron. Then, in a fit of compulsion, decided to buy the sigma 105 macro as well. Thanks again!

[ccfutbol]

I just chose the 17-50 to go with my D80 and Nikon fixed focus lenses.

It should arrive later this week. I'm interested in the comment about the different versions (Chinese vs. Japanese assembly). Makes me think that I should test the lens. I'd welcome some easily applicable testing regiments that can be done this weekend. I tried the lens out in a camera store and I decided to go with it for these reasons:

-Price for the expected performance conpared to competition

-Versatility offered by 2.8 max ap (low light at events and blurred backgrounds at 50 2.8

-Image quality (from what I could determine on the camera's screen and reports on the web

-Ease of handling and smallish size (love that (!) although I wish I didn't have to get a totally different filter size) I'm just not a big fan of big heavy cameras with big long lenses, ,... not for much of my shooting and especially not for people shots. I don't mind them in landscape or sports applications. I think I'm gonna love this small 2.8 zoom. I can't believe I didn't buy a Nikon! First time for me.

-It's wide enough for fairly dramatic landscapes and it will be good for group portraits and environmental portraiture. Individual portrature will require getting in close so I'll have to work on my "relationship" skills (smile). I was pretty much in the salesman's face to get a head and shoulder's shot.

-I would have preferred 70 on the long end but I've learned to crop and that's why I went for a camera with some megapixels to spare. It was a reach to get this lens, money-wise, and the really versatile 18-200 was just too expensive for me. I'll have to make do with my 70-300 for the long end of things.

 

I don't know if any of this matches what your thoughts are Jason. This is going to be pretty close to the 28-105 I had on my film camera with sacrifice of the long end but the benefits of the constant 2.8 and a bit more wide end. I wish they had added just that little bit more reach to 55. (smile) The 18-70 Nikon was tempting me, but for a bit more money I got wider and faster. I think it's a better trade-off. Not so worried about the build quality because the Tammy has a 6 year warranty. A lot changes in 6 years and I hope it will have served me well over that stretch.

 

C. C.