Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 vs Tamron 70-200 f/2.8; My experience

[A/Ox4]

When I was looking for information on which 70-200 2.8 lens to get, I found a lot of conflicting information. I almost immediately eliminated the Nikon based on price. So it was down to the Sigma and Tamron (although I also considered the Nikon 70-200 f/4).

I purchased the Sigma due to a slightly lower price point, and couldnt find any information to suggest the Tamron was significantly better than the Sigma, and even some information that the Tamron build quality was a little low, even for the non "Name Brand" segment*. (* I tend to include Sigma and Tamron as "name brands" these days since they are coming up!)

Well, my Sigma was fine. It took pictures, but it never really WOW'd me. I was also investigating a possible front-focusing issue.

Shortly after getting my lens, all of my gear was stolen and when I replaced it, I got the Tamron. And boy am I happy that I did!

Here is a summary of what I have noticed for the Sigma Vs Tamron:

- Tamron VC is at least 1 stop better and more effective than Sigma OS. Sigma OS seems to only sometimes be on, and is laggy to engage.
- Tamron is sharper, even when not viewing 1:1, and is sharp at all aperatures, edge to edge,
- Sigma may be every so very slighly above in general build quality, noted only really in the switches.
- Tamron is weather-sealed; Sigma is not.

 

[fjrabon]

Yeah, I've never been a fan of the sigma 70-200 f/2.8s

Though I tried their 120-300 f/2.8 S series lens last week. And dear god that thing is incredible. Maybe the best telephoto zoom I've ever used. Especially when paired with the customization that the sigma dock allows for.

 

[goodguy]

One of the members here has a Sigma and I have the Tamron, from seeing his work I was very impressed with the Sigma.
I could have bought the Sigma but it was 100$ cheaper.
All the reviews say the Tamron is better but the Sigma is an excellent lens and will be more then enough for most but when you look at 100$ difference then the Tamorn is a no brainer.
I also believe if you ever want to sell the lens the Tamron will keep its value much better.

 

[LiquidGrace]

This doesn't add any value, but thank you so much for posting this! I've been going back and forth on which lens I should get. Like you I found the Nikon to be out of reach financially. This just helped give me the shove I needed
So I wanted to say a big thank you!

 

[Braineack]

If you look at my sig, it suggests I'm happy with a particular brand.

 

[fjrabon]

One of the members here has a Sigma and I have the Tamron, from seeing his work I was very impressed with the Sigma.
I could have bought the Sigma but it was 100$ cheaper.
All the reviews say the Tamron is better but the Sigma is an excellent lens and will be more then enough for most but when you look at 100$ difference then the Tamorn is a no brainer.
I also believe if you ever want to sell the lens the Tamron will keep its value much better.

yeah, I think the non A, C and S Sigmas are gonna nose dive in value once Sigma is finished revamping their lineup. I really wouldn't buy anything outside of A, C and S lenses from them right now if you're at all worried about resale value. But I think the A, C and S lenses they make will turn out to be real value holders.