Tamron 18-250mm vs. Sigma 18-200mm

[Novux]

Hey everyone, fairly new here.

I've been actively involved in digital photography as a hobby and semi-profitable activity for about 2.5 years now, and have recently upgraded my Canon DSLR to the new T2i. (Thoroughly enjoyable) I have the standard 18-55mm kit lens, a Canon 70-300mm, and a Sigma 10-20mm wide-angle lens all in my possession. For my next lens, I'm interested in acquiring a versatile "walkaround" lens so i don't need to tote around a gear bag everywhere, with a bonus of keeping my Rebel with me everywhere.

So. My considerations currently are the

Tamron AF 18-250mm F/3.5-6.3 Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) Macro Zoom Lens
and the
Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC AF OS (Optical Stabilizer) Zoom Lens

I can't post links as of yet, but I will update this post ASAP with links to Amazon and any other relevant product pages.

So, photographers, what lens would you recommend? They're both relatively similar, Canon compatible, very similar in price, consumer rating, and functionality. I will be buying one of these two, and I'm looking for some other photographers advice. What do you think?

 

[Light Artisan]

Why not the Sigma 18-250? I had one and it was a great lens for it's intended purpose.

 

[Novux]

Why not the Sigma 18-250? I had one and it was a great lens for it's intended purpose.

That's what I'm leaning towards currently, as I've already had a Sigma for some time now. Is the extra 50mm on the Tamron worth it, though? I'm also unsure of any little indescrepencies (AF speed, sensitivity, ect)

 

[Light Artisan]

Sigma also makes an 18-250 is what I meant...
Sigma Zoom Super Wide Angle 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS (Optical Stabilizer) HSM Lens for Nikon Digital SLR | Ultra Wide - Telephoto | Sigma 880-306 @ Photo 4 Less

 

[Novux]

Sigma also makes an 18-250 is what I meant...
[/url]

Ah. Misread your original comment. My primary reason is price. Another $100.00 is stretching it a bit at this point in my budget.

 

[djacobox372]

I wonder if an advanced point-and-shoot like a canon G12 would be a better choice for "walking around," then one of these mega-zooms.

 

[tirediron]

Save your money, buy better glass and and become one with the gadget bag!

 

[Novux]

I wonder if an advanced point-and-shoot like a canon G12 would be a better choice for "walking around," then one of these mega-zooms.

A point-and-shoot is certainly out of the question. I have about $1200 invested in my gear collection, and I'm serious about perfecting the skill/art of the shutterbug. After spending over two years with a DSLR in my hands, i don't think a point-and-shoot would be considered a step forward.

Save your money, buy better glass and and become one with the gadget bag!

While i'd love to get my hands on an EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS, there's no way i can conceivably justify that on a college student budget. What I want right now is the flexibility to shoot anything, anywhere, anytime, without planning ahead. More shots means more practice means better photos.

So if you HAD to pick one, which would you?

 

[tirediron]

I would sacrifice the range for quality and go for a better-quality, mid-range zoom; something in the 18-70 range.

 

[Novux]

I would sacrifice the range for quality and go for a better-quality, mid-range zoom; something in the 18-70 range.

Care to link me to a particular favorite/suggested lens?

 

[Dao]

My question is what focal length or range do you use the most?

If most of the photo you took were between 18mm to 100mm, having one lens to cover 18mm to 200mm may not be the best choice. As we all know, those super zoom lenses especially the earlier version are very bad in terms of optical performance. i.e. Sigma 18-200mm OS lens. From what I read, the optical performance of the lens is like roller coaster. Up and down, up and down.

As for walk around, I usually carry my Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens together with a prime lens. The prime could be 50mm, 85mm, 100mm or sometimes it is the 14mm.

It's because most of my photos fall between 17mm to 85mm (1.6x crop) (esp the shorter range between 20mm to 50mm)

You may want to take a peek of what you focal length range you usually use and go from there. Of course, if the range is indeed from 18mm to 200mm and they are pretty even, a super zoom lens is not a bad choice. And I will recommend the Sigma 18-250mm OS lens as mentioned above based on the reviews.

 

[JustAnEngineer]

The super-zoom lenses are jacks of all trades and masters of none. There are a lot of compromises in the design to cover such a large range of focal lengths. If you absolutely must get a super-zoom, the new Tamron Di-II 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 VC PZD for about $650 may be the best of the lot.

If you can do without the long telephoto end, the Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM for about $700 gets good reviews.

 

[Dao]

By the way, if you want to know which focal lengths you use the most, this free software is very helpful.



ExposurePlot (former Focalplot)

 

[Derrel]

I'd say just buy one of the two lenses you're interested in. Enjoy it.

 

[Pepperpwni]

I have only dived into photography in the past two weeks; my girlfriend got me the rebel XS since she knew I was just dipping my toes in. A friend of mine who is a pro gave me a ton of tips on how to shoot over the past two weeks. I decided that a walk-around lens would be a good first lens to get (and to completely replace my kit lens).

I went with the Tamron 18-270 and I couldn't be happier.
I'll put up some of my shots with the Tamron sometime soon.. maybe it can help you in your decision making process.

Honestly, either will probably be fine, though.