Sigma 10-20mm vs Tamron 10-24mm

D

DaydreamJay

Messages
496
Name
Jason
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi I don't know if there has been a thread on this before, I had a quick search.

I am currently after a lens similar to the Sigma 10-20mm (Pentax fit) but my budget is £250 and Sigmas seem to fetch about £300 second hand.

I was looking at the Tamron as an alternative but wondered if the slightly cheaper price was because it wasn't as good. Or is it simply that it is a less desirable item than the Sigma?

Does anyone have experience of both lenses? Or comments on one or the other?
 
FWIW I tried both before plumping for the Sigma, just felt better and more solidly built, I also found it a bit sharper but then that may be a good copy vs bad one possibly?
 
Not sure about the Tamron, but one lens that I won't be selling is the Sigma, a fantastic lens and one of my favourite lenses on a DX frame.
 
another vote for the sigma. good value at £300. The tokina 11-16mm sees to go upwards of £500.
 
Looking at reviews it seems that softness in the corners and at the widest apertures are the main criticisms.

As this sort of lens is probably going to be used stopped down a bit I don't think I'd worry too much if I was looking for a bargain wide lens rather than the best possible optical quality.
 
Assuming we're talking about the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 and not the f/3.5, it's worth waiting, saving the extra 50 quid and going for it.

If you're shooting landscapes and such at f/8, the Sigma's great, razor sharp all over and very very very little barrel distortion (pretty much unnoticable).

I'll never get rid of mine. :)
 
Looking like Sigma then.... this is getting expensive - everytime I buy something for my camera the girlfriend goes out and spends the same amount of money on shoes and bags :(
 
The Sigma is not expensive for what you get. The focussing system alone is worth the cash you'll drop on it...
 
Contrary to your helpful advice, I have bought the Tamron - basically because there was one ending on ebay this afternoon and my requirement was fairly urgent.

I paid £280 + £10 P&P but my logic is that I can use it for the few pics I need to do in the next couple of weeks and then if I am not happy I can stick it back on Ebay and in the mean time I will have hopefully saved some more cash to buy a Sigma.

I'll post some test pics when I receive it.
 
I bought the Tamron 10-24 new, didn't like it so traded it in for a new Siggy 10-20. Lost a lot of cash in the trade but glad I did it. The Tamron was way too soft for my liking - the Siggy is much better in all respects, build, IQ, focussing etc.
 
Yeah Jules, I am half expecting to do the same
with this one, but if I have dropped on a good one then
who knows...
 
DaydreamJay said:
Contrary to your helpful advice, I have bought the Tamron - basically because there was one ending on ebay this afternoon and my requirement was fairly urgent.

I paid £280 + £10 P&P but my logic is that I can use it for the few pics I need to do in the next couple of weeks and then if I am not happy I can stick it back on Ebay and in the mean time I will have hopefully saved some more cash to buy a Sigma.

I'll post some test pics when I receive it.
Click to expand...

You would have picked up a second hand Sigma for less than that.
 
Actually, no, I thought the Sigma 10-20mm was better than the Nikon 10-24 or 12-24 - which is why I chose it over either of the other two.
 
Never used the Tamron but I use the sigma with my canon bodies and love it
 
I have been thinking about getting the Sigma lens and I think I have been persuaded by this thread. Do you think it will be ok on a Nikon D40 or will it be pointless?
Dunc
 
@ PandyD40
It will work perfectly on a D40 as it has the focussing motor (HSM) built in and is designed for the crop sensor size as well - go get one, you won't regret it
 
I bought a new Sigma a couple of weeks ago and I can echo the other posters,it is a very good lens.It is very sharp and gives nice colour rendition.
If you look at the landscapes and scenery section I have three photos on there taken with the Siggy lens.The thread is Rutland Water.
 
This is a question that has been asked many, many times. The ultimate test is for any individual to test and try. I would agree that the pro lobby seems to go with the Sigma 10-20 although I went to Jessops and tried the Tamron and was quite impressed with the image quality. I also had a look at the Flickr "Tamron 10-24" group images and was surprised with the varied subjects and quality of wide angle images. So I bought one from Jessops (who don't stock the Sigma) which was discounted at the time and to date I am very satisfied with it. :)
 
I have tried both the Tokina 12-24 (which I own) and the Sigma 10-20 in similar conditions both on a Canon 40d. The results from both were excellent and very comparable. To be honest either would be a very safe bet and as I have the Tokina I have a slight bias towards it. It is built like a tank and produces consistent results every time. (not sure if you can get it in the mount you need though).
 
Kaouthia said:
Actually, no, I thought the Sigma 10-20mm was better than the Nikon 10-24 or 12-24 - which is why I chose it over either of the other two.
Click to expand...

I have tried them all and found the Tokina 11-16 to be the best :D- shows you how subjective it can be and of course it depends which lens suits your needs as well.
 
I have the Tamron 10-24 for my Nikon, I must say I want to impressed with the results in low light, got better results from a 18-55 Nikon lens, but in good light the results arn't that bad. Not my fav lens in my bag thinking of changing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top