Better Image quality. Sigma or Tamron?

wonderer

wonderer

Messages
206
Edit My Images
Yes
Im looking for a decent zoom lens to replace the Nikon kit 18-105. I shoot mainly portraits and lots of children so I want to opt for a zoom around the 18/20-70/85 range purely for ease.

Image quality is my number one request but the top tier Nikons are a little rich for me. So we have Tamron and Sigma. Can anyone name a really good glass from both or either of these brands and is their a universally regarded better make out of the two?

The world of lens is a bit of a minefield for some of us. I currently have D90 but would like a lens that will also be compatible with the D7100 as I am hoping to upgrade the body soon as well. :thumbs:
 
wonderer said:
Im looking for a decent zoom lens to replace the Nikon kit 18-105. I shoot mainly portraits and lots of children so I want to opt for a zoom around the 18/20-70/85 range purely for ease.

Image quality is my number one request but the top tier Nikons are a little rich for me. So we have Tamron and Sigma. Can anyone name a really good glass from both or either of these brands and is their a universally regarded better make out of the two?

The world of lens is a bit of a minefield for some of us. I currently have D90 but would like a lens that will also be compatible with the D7100 as I am hoping to upgrade the body soon as well. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Hi. I had (have) a d90. The first two lenses I got were a 50 f1.8 and a 70-300 vr. I then got a samyang 85 f1.4 which is a sensational lens if you don't mind manual focus.

I sold my 18-105 and replaced it with a tamron 17-50 f2.8 non VC. A great lens at the price and much better than the kit lens (if not as versatile). I mainly do portraits of kids (have a look at my Flickr - majority are with the d90) I also have a sigma 70-200 f2.8 (good but not as good as the Nikon equivalent) and the tamron 28-75 f2.8 (my most used lens at present!)

Hope that helps? Happy to help further if needed

S
 
When you say "top tier Nikons" are you discounting the 17-55 f/2.8? As it's a £1K I assume it is?

If you want a lens for shooting portraits then have you considered a Nikon prime lens that is ideal for portraits, rather than a "bit of an all rounder"? The 50mm f/1.4G (£295), 50mm f/1.8G (£155), 35mm f/1.8G (£160) would be a better idea no?

I personally have the 50mm f/1.4G and it is many peoples favourite lens.
 
if your willing to spend a bit more the new Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS is really good as well.
 
Digifrog said:
If you want a lens for shooting portraits then have you considered a Nikon prime lens that is ideal for portraits, rather than a "bit of an all rounder"?...
Click to expand...

Primes are lovely and I mostly use them myself but IMVHO once a good zoom is stopped down just a bit you're going to be hard pressed to tell a quality 17-50mm shot from a prime shot. At f1.4 the prime wins :D but the Tamron 17-50mm I had was already sharp at f2.8 and was generally the sharpest zoom I've ever owned. Not that sharpness is everything but it's one thing to consider, bokeh was good too.

The only critisism I had was that there was a bit of distortion at the wide end but other than that it's a very good zoom IMVHO. As I remember, in reviews it tended to narrowly beat the similar Sigma 18-50mm f2.8.
 
woof woof said:
Primes are lovely and I mostly use them myself but IMVHO once a good zoom is stopped down just a bit you're going to be hard pressed to tell a quality 17-50mm shot from a prime shot. At f1.4 the prime wins :D but the Tamron 17-50mm I had was already sharp at f2.8 and was generally the sharpest zoom I've ever owned. Not that sharpness is everything but it's one thing to consider, bokeh was good too.

The only critisism I had was that there was a bit of distortion at the wide end but other than that it's a very good zoom IMVHO. As I remember, in reviews it tended to narrowly beat the similar Sigma 18-50mm f2.8.
Click to expand...

In regards to prime vs zoom it really depends on what lenses you are comparing against. Lens selection is ultimately the key factor here...

Most of the zooms I have owned are at least as sharp as most if the primes I have owned wide open.
 
Phil Young said:
In regards to prime vs zoom it really depends on what lenses you are comparing against. Lens selection is ultimately the key factor here...

Most of the zooms I have owned are at least as sharp as most if the primes I have owned wide open.
Click to expand...

I personally wouldn't expect most even quality zooms to be as good as a quality prime at the zooms widest setting. Some may be as good as a prime at f2.8 but remembering that the prime has probably stopped down from f1.4 I think they'll be few and far between. One the zoom has been stopped down a bit thougth I personally would expect most people to have trouble telling shots apart. Distortion and bokeh are other things to worry about :D
 
woof woof said:
I personally wouldn't expect most even quality zooms to be as good as a quality prime at the zooms widest setting. Some may be as good as a prime at f2.8 but remembering that the prime has probably stopped down from f1.4 I think they'll be few and far between. One the zoom has been stopped down a bit thougth I personally would expect most people to have trouble telling shots apart. Distortion and bokeh are other things to worry about :D
Click to expand...

Based on pure sharpness...

These zooms I have owned were all sharper than my 50mm 1.4 & 1.8 afd wide open and as sharp as my 35 & 50mm 1.8 afs:

18-55
55-200
18-200
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top