Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 v Tamron 28-75mm F2.8

[sbeecroft]

I am looking at purchasing either the Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 or the Tamron 28-75mm F2.8. The lens would be predominantly used for portraiture. The Tamron is around about £100 cheaper. Has anybody got any experience of shooting with both? or any reviews of using 1 or the other.

Thanks in advance.

 

[lexie]

i'm having a similar debate with myself at the minute mate. but it's the tamron 17-50 2.8, rather than the 28-75 2.8, which i'm looking at. the general consensus will likely be that 28mm will be too long on a crop sensor, but if you aren't concerned with the wide end of things either will probably be ok for portrait use.

the tamron will be a fair but smaller than the sigma from what i've read, and i have used the sigma (briefly) on a 500d and it was a pretty big piece of kit.

both lenses are reviewed on this site:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/

 

[LongLensPhotography]

There is no debate, get the Tamron. It is near enough good vs bad

 

[Dogfish_magnet]

I've had both (non-os version of the siggy) and the personally think the Tamron is a much better lens - better contrast, colours and sharper by quite a margin.

 

[lexie]

There is no debate, get the Tamron. It is near enough good vs bad

tamron 17-50 or 28-75?

 

[Dogfish_magnet]

tamron 17-50 or 28-75?

17-50 non VC on a crop body - I've had that one as well on both Canon and Nikon bodies

 

[lexie]

17-50 non VC on a crop body - I've had that one as well on both Canon and Nikon bodies

thanks for clarifying, i was confused because the OP had mentioned the 28-75 and then i mentioned the 17-50

 

[LongLensPhotography]

tamron 17-50 or 28-75?

for portraits I'd say 28-75mm. 17-50 will be too short (but it is a better general purpose lens on crop so it depends on the use)