Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 or Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8...?

N

Naith

Messages
716
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi

Can anyone give me the answer to this one?

Is there a clear cut winner? (doubting this to be honest!)

Cheers
 
Don't think so. Few people would have had both to compare although there seems to be more people behind the 17-50mm, probably even those who never had one! :)

Someone I know with a Tamron 17-50 wasn't impressed on build quality or optics. I have a Tamron 17-35 and if it's like that I'd have no complaints - that is a good lens.

I have the Sigma 18-50mm and am impressed on both build quality and optics! It really is very sharp particularly from around f4. I have noticed though that my D300 occasionally does hunt around a little with this lens and there is a bit of a whining noise on nfocussing, although there are no faults. Basically not as quiet as a SWM.
 
I was determined to get the Tamron, but rather top notch Ebay bargain managed to change my mind and I ended up getting a nearly new Sigma 18-50, f2.8 and I have been very happy with it ever since as it is a very nice lens indeed. Sorry, don't know if that helps you very much!
 
Thanks for the replies (y)

I must admit I prefer the build quality of the Sigma, but at the end of the day it's IQ that has to take priority as I look after my gear religiously.

I've seen both of them go for around the £170 mark recently so there's nothing between them price wise. Maybe I'll take my camera into town and try both of them out...
 
Are you sure? The Tamron seems to go more frequently at around £230 and the 18-50 just a little under, at tleast in these forums.
 
Naith said:
Thanks for the replies (y)

I must admit I prefer the build quality of the Sigma, but at the end of the day it's IQ that has to take priority as I look after my gear religiously.

I've seen both of them go for around the £170 mark recently so there's nothing between them price wise. Maybe I'll take my camera into town and try both of them out...
Click to expand...

yeah i think photography should be a religion however it would give the public more reasons of us being paedophiles thanks to stupid catholic preists lol
 
I have the tamron, its a great lens, I have no complaints about mine :)
 
BlackCloud said:
Don't think so. Few people would have had both to compare although there seems to be more people behind the 17-50mm, probably even those who never had one! :)

Someone I know with a Tamron 17-50 wasn't impressed on build quality or optics. I have a Tamron 17-35 and if it's like that I'd have no complaints - that is a good lens.

I have the Sigma 18-50mm and am impressed on both build quality and optics! It really is very sharp particularly from around f4. I have noticed though that my D300 occasionally does hunt around a little with this lens and there is a bit of a whining noise on nfocussing, although there are no faults. Basically not as quiet as a SWM.
Click to expand...

dont think theres much in it really. I dont think the build quality on the tamron is too bad and I'd pretty much describe my tamron in the same way you described your sigma.

I went to a wedding yesterday and took pics alongside a friend of mine using the sigma. He played around with my tamron and couldnt tell any difference. He did mention it seemed to focus a bit quicker but i did also mention you get some hunting with it occassionally.
 
I went for the tamron as I've been put off sigmas...having said that, I've since purchased a mid zoom sigma which I love
the motors are so much better than they used to me.
for me the tamron is very good but just misses the focus at times in low light
still like it though, can't comment on the sigma. the older sigmas I had really put me off focus consistency
 
The tamron is generally regarded as having better image quality, and certainly packs waaaay above its price point. The build quality is ok, not as good as the sigma EX glass that I own, but haven't ever seen a 18-50 so can't comment on that particular model.

Either way, you'll be happy with it, it's a great step up from kit lenses!
 
got a 17-50 today, build is nice enough, similar to medium quality canon lenses :p

on canon the focus is the noisest thing I have ever heard, its like an electric drill FFS. NOT stealthy atall :(

mean't to be USM/sonic in a nikon fit though
 
i ordered a 2nd hand tamron of amazon marketplace today, after reading many reviews, people tend to favour the tamron. Although I heard that it does create a lot of noise when focusing. That may be a turnoff for weddings togs. Imagine trying to shooting the exchange of vows with a dentists drill going off. lol
 
tamron is better cos its smaller and i think it's excellent build. and the optics is superb although its biased cos i ahve not seen the Sigma's performance first hand
 
I have the Tamron and i love the lens. It gets quite a lot of use and has a pretty decent focal range.
 
Tamron. 1mm wider , better IQ and resell value . And since you're using nikon, you won't have the motor noise problem.
 
Yes, and probably oly & pentax mounts. The nikon mounted one seems a bit bigger, or at least i remember it bigger & heavier, never actually got my hands on a canon one before buying, only a nikon one.

And yes, I can confirm, the AF noise is WORSE than a budget end tokina thats been submerged, drained, mined, caved & filled with teh dust of dead frenchman. Its also noisier than most budget 90's canon AF's jobs, shocking noisy, BUT MUCH more accurate than other tamrons I've tried, and fast to scroll thru AF positions.

Whats IQ? Is that a term for resolution? From a quick few shots against existing lenses, its certainly sharper & less noisy, more contrast & nicer colours than the lenses it replaces (although they were all budget lenses), and the difference in flare/ chromation is unreal, as in, nil, none detectable on same for same shots... hold on, might post some shocking images :p

IMG_9922.jpg

OK first shot, from fresh 17-50 tamron @ f4.5 35mm erm, 1/50th ish & iso400/800.
focussed on the 'H' of aspherical on the right side of box. Looks alright, accurate colours nice contrast etc. The room is fairly dark, the window is behind the box, no lens hood

IMG_9923.jpg

second shot, from battered tokina 19-35 @ f4.5, 35mm 1/50th is, & iso400/800
Holy mother, this is the problem I've had with this lens on a digi body, it flares hidously, doesn't focus properly (the body confirmed AF lock on the same 'H' of aspherical), is soft and glarey, flat looking.

I know its a pants comparison, the tokina is a budget lens (an old one at that), the tamron is a modern medium quality lens that is reputed to be sharper than its closer rivals, but it just amazed me at the difference!
I use the 19-35mm happily on film and don't get any of the focus lock/confirm/hunting issues that I do on a digi body, and nowhere near the flaring & chromatic abberation/purple fringing problems etc either.
 
BlackCloud said:
Don't think so. Few people would have had both to compare although there seems to be more people behind the 17-50mm, probably even those who never had one! :)

Someone I know with a Tamron 17-50 wasn't impressed on build quality or optics. I have a Tamron 17-35 and if it's like that I'd have no complaints - that is a good lens.
Click to expand...
I don't know about now, but I do know in the past Tamron had QA issues with the lenses made in China. I'd heard that buying you needed to test them for safety and if buying second hand then ask to look at photos shot with them. Personally I've got a Tamron 17-50 and it's a sweet, sharp, light little lens.
 
BlackCloud said:
Are you sure? The Tamron seems to go more frequently at around £230 and the 18-50 just a little under, at tleast in these forums.
Click to expand...

where did you find those prices?
 
So would most people recommend the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 over the Sigma 18-50 f2.8?

Want to try them out tonight but want to know what is gonna be better.
 
I too went through the same decision making last year and went with the Tamron and not looked back. I've had fantastic results with over the year with both the canon 350D and 40D DSLR.

I made sure my was made in Japan based on the comments on the internet.

The autofocus is a bit noisy but to be honest I've used it in weddings and other special occasions and never been an issue. The results to me are the most important factor and this lens certainly delivers.

Go ahead....won't be disappointed.;)
 
i received mine off amazon 2nd hand for £240. I'll let you know how I get on with it.
 
hsuffyan said:
i received mine off amazon 2nd hand for £240. I'll let you know how I get on with it.
Click to expand...

when you buy 2nd hand from amazon - does it have some warranty or is it checked for 100% working?
 
the guy had pretty good feedback, but its the risk I was prepared to take. If it doesnt work out, some chump on fleabay will pay £300 for it surely :LOL:
 
I heard good stuff about the Tampon (from this forum actually) but I opted for the Sigma because I wanted the HSM version, which is the later one of the Sigma 18-50 f2.8.
 
tamron focus is retardedly loud, but it doenst bother me.

its fast and accurate
 
I have the Siggy 18-50 2.8 HSM Macro and it's superb. Sharp at pretty much any setting and really pulls the best from the D40.
 
What about that back focusing and all..? I love the idea of this lens, but after Ive read hundreds of reviews people say that you need to get a good sample...
Is it really that hard to buy a good, working one?:(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top