Tamron vs Sigma: anti-shake?

doziergraphic

TPF Noob!
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
383
Reaction score
6
Location
Indianapolis
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
I purchased the Tamron lens below for about $300. But it doesn't have any sort of 'anti-shake' built in. the Sigma (obviously with extra length) is $479 and has 'anti-shake' compensation.

Taking shots last night of the cityscape, wondering how much of my long exposure 'blur' was lens (used mirror lock). Assuming ANY 'anti-shake' is better than none at all? And assuming Sigma and Tamron are about equal in quality?

what say you all?

Sigma 18-250
Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM (Canon)

Tamron 18-200
Tamron AF18-200mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di II (Canon)
 
IMO, IS, VR, OS, or whatever the maker calls it is a highly over-hyped, and often unnecessary feature. There are times when it's useful, but in a relatively small, lightweight lens that only goes to 250mm, I wouldn't worry about it.

Since night shots are often in the 1 sec+ range, even the best VR system is still not going to get you into handholding range.

The best anti-shake system money can buy!
 
I did get a cheapie $50 tripod, guess I should upgrade that too huh!
 
IMO, IS, VR, OS, or whatever the maker calls it is a highly over-hyped, and often unnecessary feature. There are times when it's useful, but in a relatively small, lightweight lens that only goes to 250mm, I wouldn't worry about it.

Since night shots are often in the 1 sec+ range, even the best VR system is still not going to get you into handholding range.

I couldn't agree more. I got an 18-55mm VR lens in the kit with my Nikon D5000... I can't really think of many instances where I ever really benefitted much from using its VR function. I'm on a tripod 75% of the time anyway, but even when I'm going hand-held, I'm generally dialing in a fast enough shutter speed that camera-shake is negligable. Image stabilization is really pretty over-rated at short focal lengths. Though I would be curious to see how it functions on a longer 300mm lens or so.

I have heard from a couple different sources that enabling anti-shake when your camera is already on a tripod may end up decreasing image quality rather than enhancing it. I have never really tested this claim for myself, admittedly. But, I think that the general concept is this:

When you engage anti-shake, the actual mechanism which dampens camera shake is released. If your camera is already sufficiently steady on a tripod, then it opens the potential for any imprecision in the shake-compensation to blur the photograph. So, I guess the idea is that, if you're shot is steady to begin with, anti-shake can't really help you out and it's being engaged only opens the door for potential interference.

Perhaps somebody else on the forum has tested this claim? I know there are varying approaches to anti-shake technology, so maybe this is only the case with some systems.

I did get a cheapie $50 tripod, guess I should upgrade that too huh!

A good, quality tripod is certainly a huge help... but spectacular photographs can be taken even with relatively inexpensive tripods... even with very long exposures. Just avoid setting up in a windy area, plant it on a firm surface, use a remote shutter release, and even watch out for vibrations caused by your footsteps that could be transmitted through the ground into your tripod. For instance, on shots I've made from bridges (both wooden and larger, metal types), I usually refrain even from taking a single step while my camera is exposing a shot.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top