Standard Zoom Lens

[fsquare]

Looking at the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 HSM or Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. Anyone have any of the two? Comments or Reviews? Any other suggestions? This is pretty much to be used as a walk around lens.

[Ads]

[Stephen.C]

I've been looking for one too, and the reviews on the tamron have been very good.

[nce]

I have the Sigma OS 17-50 and am liking it a lot. The only thing that took some getting used to was that the focus ring moves when autofocusing. As far as IQ is concerned it is great. I know that people say that image stabilization is not necessary on lenses of this focal length but I like having it and find it useful. It is more expensive than the 2 you are looking at bit can be had new on ebay for $615.00 and imo is worth every penny.

[bazooka]

The Tamron was my first lens and I opted to get that instead of a kit lens. I'm glad I did... it's a very sharp lens and I'm very happy with it. It does have noteicable vignetting at 2.8, but it can be greatly reduced if not completely eliminated in RAW.

[fsquare]

The only thing pushing me towards the Sigma is the minimum focusing distance 10.6 (Tamron) compared to 7.9" (Sigma)

[orb9220]

Why would minimum focusing distance be an issue? That doesn't mean more macro.
and when it comes to macro I would want longer minimum focus distance to give me breathing space. The Sigma isn't going to macro anymore than the tamron.

Any closer like with the sigma and might have scared him off.
So just cropped the picture to get in closer.


Bug Cushy Job (Crop) by orb9220, on Flickr

And the Tamron is sharper wide open as a general rule than the Sigma. Or that is from others that have used both say anyways.


Holding the Beads Series 1 of 5 -ReDux by orb9220, on Flickr

I have been quite please with my tamron as a upgrade to the kit lens for 3yrs now.
Usability in lower light and Image IQ takes the next step up.

But yep either one would fit the bill nicely. Would recommend going in a store if possible and try them both out.

[fsquare]

Thanks Orb and great shots.

Found a Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC HSM used for a great price. The Tamron i'd want to buy new with VC. So we're talking $450 Tamron vs $300 Sigma. Still trying to make up my mind.

[orb9220]

Well the non-VC is just as good image IQ and sharpness wise. And generally VC for most isn't worth the extra $150 over the older version I have.

But I am hearing the newer Sigma's have caught up to sharpness at f2.8. But they of course cost more than the older Sigma 18-50 f2.8.

As long as you buy from a reputable dealer with good exchange/return policies. As 3rd party have a tendency to have more lemons out in the wild. I have bought 2 of the tamron 17-50 f2.8 for $350 used. But have been luck they both have been great and no problems.
.

[fsquare]

The other thing with Sigma is that in Canada their warranty is 10 years on EX lenses. The reviews are also mixed. So freaking hard to choose. I'll have to try them out in stores but i can't stand wasting a salesperson's time when I know i won't buy from them.