Tamron 150-600 Or Sigma 35mm Art or 24mm Art... Thoughts?

D-B-J

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Apr 13, 2010
Messages
9,027
Reaction score
2,175
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
I realize there's a huge discrepancy in what these lenses are intended for, but I am having difficulty in choosing what to get next. Currently I have a Nikon 16-35 F4 VRII, Nikon 50mm 1.8G, 85mm 1.8G, and Tamron 70-200 2.8VC.

Here's my thoughts on what each lens would do for me...

150-600 | I currently have nothing like this lens. I plan to do a lot of kayaking and such this summer, and could do lots of birding with this lens...Opens up a whole new world of photography for me.

35 Art | Would be boss as a walk-around lens, and killer for "scene" shots of couples with shallow DOF. The fact that it's almost apochromatic makes me drool...

24 Art | Similar as above, but wider. Maybe not as useful as the 35, and the reviews say it's less apochromatic and a slow focuser--so not a huge contender.

What do YOU think? Seeing Jon Secord's and others work with the Tamzooka makes me think that's really what I want, but the 35 will be great for portrait work and that's what makes the money.


Currently I plan on renting the 35 to take with me to the Daffodil festival on Nantucket at the end of this month to see if it really makes a difference....


Jake
 
The 24art was definitely on my list until a few photographers I know bought one, and it does not perform well at all for astro work....no go for me. Other than that it seems like a great lens.

The 35art is no doubt one amazing piece of glass, gonna be a tough decision for you.
 
The 24art was definitely on my list until a few photographers I know bought one, and it does not perform well at all for astro work....no go for me. Other than that it seems like a great lens.

The 35art is no doubt one amazing piece of glass, gonna be a tough decision for you.

I figure renting it for a full-day of shooting will really help me decide.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I'd wait for the 85mm art that is due out soon.

I would NOT want to take the 150-600 kayaking. Too heavy and cumbersome.
 
I don't mean this to offend you, but this is a kind of silly question. You're essentially asking "what type of photography do you other people think will be more important to me, personally, down the road: portraits or wildlife?" Nobody can remotely answer that but you. They're all great lens, that are intended to do entirely different things. How you use your camera will be substantially more important than any actual characteristics of these lenses.
 
I'd wait for the 85mm art that is due out soon.

I would NOT want to take the 150-600 kayaking. Too heavy and cumbersome.

Really? I'll be kayaking with the Tamron this summer for sure. I don't find it to be very heavy at all
 
I'd wait for the 85mm art that is due out soon.

I would NOT want to take the 150-600 kayaking. Too heavy and cumbersome.

I already have Nikons 85, and right now I'd rather have a different focal length or lens than replace/upgrade.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I don't mean this to offend you, but this is a kind of silly question. You're essentially asking "what type of photography do you other people think will be more important to me, personally, down the road: portraits or wildlife?" Nobody can remotely answer that but you. They're all great lens, that are intended to do entirely different things. How you use your camera will be substantially more important than any actual characteristics of these lenses.

Oh I'm fully aware. But someone here might have valuable input on these lenses that I didn't know before posting (like Jon's hands on info about the 24, reaffirming what I read in reviews).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The Tamzooka is an absolute blast mate. I got mine earlier this week and it's really fun. It's suprised me just how excited I am about shooting with it.

So just for the extra capibility and fun factor I'd go for that.
 
I'd wait for the 85mm art that is due out soon.

I would NOT want to take the 150-600 kayaking. Too heavy and cumbersome.

Really? I'll be kayaking with the Tamron this summer for sure. I don't find it to be very heavy at all

You must be a better kayaker than I! I worry more about other boaters because I've gotten swamped twice.
 
You must be a better kayaker than I! I worry more about other boaters because I've gotten swamped twice.

I live about a minute away from Lake Winnipesaukee (not sure if you've heard of it, usually when I mention it most New Englander's know of it) which is a huge lake and is crazy in the summer. I definitely wouldn't be taking the tamron out in the kayak on lake winni, but I'll be taking it up to to some smaller lakes and ponds for sure
 
You have the other focal lengths pretty much covered. I would get the tamzooka.
 
You must be a better kayaker than I! I worry more about other boaters because I've gotten swamped twice.

I live about a minute away from Lake Winnipesaukee (not sure if you've heard of it, usually when I mention it most New Englander's know of it) which is a huge lake and is crazy in the summer. I definitely wouldn't be taking the tamron out in the kayak on lake winni, but I'll be taking it up to to some smaller lakes and ponds for sure

I know enough to avoid it!

Popular lakes like that are full of people who only boat a couple times a year so they have no idea what they are doing.
 
I have the 35 and it gets used. A little wider than a 50 but that works for me. Also the 1.4 comes in handy for astrophotography. Just a great lens.
 
I didn't have the funds for a tamzooka but I got a Bigma.
I had a Nikon Reflex 500 at one time but the Bigma is just fanstastic. And the Tamzooka is even better. So I'd go with the Tamzooka as you have the other focal lengths covered.

It's amazing and will open up a new genre for you to have fun with ... this is a MD-11 jet at 33,000 feet cropped according to the online flight info that I track MD-11 @10:45am 4/12/2015 @ 33,000 feet by stevesklar, on Flickr
 

Most reactions

Back
Top