Which lens tamron or sigma

M

Megz

Messages
3
Edit My Images
No
Hi sorry if this has already been.asked in another post. I am looking to get a 150 mm - 600 mm lens for my Nikon D5500. But dont know which lens is better the tamron or the sigma. I am mainly looking to use this for wildlife photography and wondered if anyone had any experience with either of these and could help me.
 
Ok thankyou i am fairly new to photography and wanted some first hand experience. I just wasbt sure if one was better than the other and if compatible with the D5500 even. Im a little sceptical to ask in shops as fear they may try and sell me the most expensive lens
 
Megz said:
Ok thankyou i am fairly new to photography and wanted some first hand experience. I just wasbt sure if one was better than the other and if compatible with the D5500 even. Im a little sceptical to ask in shops as fear they may try and sell me the most expensive lens
Click to expand...
I don't think you'd be disappointed with either of the lenses to be honest. I chose the sigma after reading lots of reviews, and having a quick play with both at a camera shop. The dock means you can customise the focus and image stabilisation settings etc.
I take mainly bird shots etc, and it's by far my most used lens.
 
Thankyou. Do you feel that you need the dock? As the lens im looking at online does not come with a dock just the lens
 
Megz said:
Thankyou. Do you feel that you need the dock? As the lens im looking at online does not come with a dock just the lens
Click to expand...
It's not absolutely necessary, but I have used it to update the firmware on my lens a couple of times. You can pick up the dock for £45 new, and I've seen them for £30 used.
Is it a new or used lens you're looking at?
 
I have the Tamron Canon version.... And it's more than an able Lens for wildlife....

I think some of the deciding factor has to be weight... The sigma is a kilo heavier than the Tamron, and the Tamron is 2kg in weight....

And believe me, lugging a combination total of 4kg's (Lens, 7dmk2 and monopod) stalking Red Stags on Exmoor during rutting season for 8 hours was totally knackering and took some doing....

The sigma probably slightly superior on focusing speed, so theory wise should hit focus more often, but saying that it more depends on the camera capabilities, if the camera slow to focus, then you're not going to gain much advantage with a fast focusing lens!

I just teamed my Tamron up with a monopod and gimbal head, and even though freehand I've got some smashing shots, was still surprised how much difference it made against hand held... But again tis heavy and I'm not sure that the sigma slightly superior edge would sway me, due to lugging another kilo of weight around..
 
Ellie Jones said:
I have the Tamron Canon version.... And it's more than an able Lens for wildlife....

I think some of the deciding factor has to be weight... The sigma is a kilo heavier than the Tamron, and the Tamron is 2kg in weight....

And believe me, lugging a combination total of 4kg's (Lens, 7dmk2 and monopod) stalking Red Stags on Exmoor during rutting season for 8 hours was totally knackering and took some doing....

The sigma probably slightly superior on focusing speed, so theory wise should hit focus more often, but saying that it more depends on the camera capabilities, if the camera slow to focus, then you're not going to gain much advantage with a fast focusing lens!

I just teamed my Tamron up with a monopod and gimbal head, and even though freehand I've got some smashing shots, was still surprised how much difference it made against hand held... But again tis heavy and I'm not sure that the sigma slightly superior edge would sway me, due to lugging another kilo of weight around..
Click to expand...
The sigma isnt a kilo heavier. It's The sport version that is heavier.
 
I have the Tamron which is a good lens and use it with Canon camera, Does the Nikon D5500 have a micro adjustment feature incase the lens focus needs adjusting ? just that the Sigma using the dock lets you adjust the focusing if its needed and if you wasn't able to adjust it in the camera :thinking:
 
After a lot of research I got the Sigma C (the equivalent of the Tamron). Everything seemed to say there is nothing between the Sigma C and the Tamron IQ wise. I did buy the dock which I used for a firmware update when I first had the lens, but I haven't used it to customise anything as I don't feel the need to. I use it on a Canon 550D, which is fairly old now and not exactly high spec, and I'm extremely happy with it. The deciding factor for me was that the Sigma has several locking positions for the zoom which the Tamron didn't have, although I believe the Tamron may have been updated since I bought, so that may no longer be the case. I use mine for astrophotography as well as wildlife, so the ability to lock the zoom was important to me.
 
Most reviews I've seen say that the Tamron is sharper at the long end but it seems to be 50/50 with users. In the real world I don't think you'll notice any difference. If the D5500 doesn't have AF fine tune I'd definitely choose the Sigma so you can use the dock.

I have the Tamron though and can't fault it in terms of IQ. It is a bit of a dust pump though.
 
As said in one of the above post, watch out for the weight, if you pick the tamron, sigma or nikon lens, they can get quite heavy after a while, when I had my Nikon D7100 and Tamron 150-600mm lens, I also used a black rapid sports strap, which you can attach to the tripod collar on the lens.
 
jerry12953 said:
Just to confuse matters there is now a Mk 2 version of the Tamron available, which is said to be a significant improvement. It's a fair bit more expensive though. It still has a weight advantage over the Sigma, I believe, which is worth remembering.
Click to expand...
Again I think you are confusing the Sigma with the Sigma Sports. The SIgma equivalent of the Tamron is the Sigma Contemporary which is 1930g, the new Tarmon is 2010g. For comparison the Gen 1 Tamron is 1951g, and the Nikon 200-500mm 2300g. The Sigma Sport is a step up from these lenses in terms of IQ and build/weather sealing but is 2860g and more expensive.
 
snerkler said:
Again I think you are confusing the Sigma with the Sigma Sports. The SIgma equivalent of the Tamron is the Sigma Contemporary which is 1930g, the new Tarmon is 2010g. For comparison the Gen 1 Tamron is 1951g, and the Nikon 200-500mm 2300g. The Sigma Sport is a step up from these lenses in terms of IQ and build/weather sealing but is 2860g and more expensive.
Click to expand...

Given that the new Tamron is supposed to be quite an improvement on the original it might be sensible to compare it with the better Sigma, which as you correctly say, is much heavier.
 
jerry12953 said:
Given that the new Tamron is supposed to be quite an improvement on the original it might be sensible to compare it with the better Sigma, which as you correctly say, is much heavier.
Click to expand...
Possibly, but until I see evidence that it's a match for the Sigma S I think it's fairer to compare to the Sigma C and Nikon 200-500 as this is what it's aimed at AFAIK. Obviously if it proves to be more in the league of the Sigma S then it's a no brainer which to go for (y)
 
jerry12953 said:
It's up to you. Arguing about equipent is a bit of a bore really........
Click to expand...
Who's arguing :confused:

Anyway, this is interesting imo. I do take these things with a pinch of salt, but interesting nonetheless imo

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0

The old tamron looks sharper to me than the G2 (in the centre at least), even when you stop down to f8 on both
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
Who's arguing :confused:

Anyway, this is interesting imo. I do take these things with a pinch of salt, but interesting nonetheless imo

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0

The old tamron looks sharper to me than the G2 (in the centre at least), even when you stop down to f8 on both
Click to expand...

That's a very good review of the three - now four - options. To summarise, the new Tamron could be described as follows:

Better in every way than version 1, other than image quality, which is roughly the same. Image quality is roughly equivalent to the Sigma Sport, while the latter is MUCH heavier.

If I was buying I'd definitely go for the new Tamron.
 
jerry12953 said:
That's a very good review of the three - now four - options. To summarise, the new Tamron could be described as follows:

Better in every way than version 1, other than image quality, which is roughly the same. Image quality is roughly equivalent to the Sigma Sport, while the latter is MUCH heavier.

If I was buying I'd definitely go for the new Tamron.
Click to expand...
Yep me too. It's why I went with the Gen 1 tamron, for the extra little bit of sharpness the Sport gives it did not justify the weight or cost for me. If I've been out and about with my D750 and Tamron 150-600mm on a sling strap I sure know about it at the end of the day, I certainly wouldn't want an extra kilo on there :eek:
 
snerkler said:
Yep me too. It's why I went with the Gen 1 tamron, for the extra little bit of sharpness the Sport gives it did not justify the weight or cost for me. If I've been out and about with my D750 and Tamron 150-600mm on a sling strap I sure know about it at the end of the day, I certainly wouldn't want an extra kilo on there :eek:
Click to expand...

I also have the Gen 1; if money was no object I'd upgrade to the Mk2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top