Tamron vs Sigma

[C4n0n.Fan]

Hi all, I'm looking to getting a 70-200mm f 2.8 For my 7D. Some say Tamron and Sigma are almost as good as the genuine canons. Of these two I cant decide as both have good votes depending on where you look. Or are they that similar it doesn't matter? Any help on this would be appreciated.

 

[KmH]

I trust this web sites opinions -
Tamron SP AF 70-200mm F2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro review: Digital Photography Review
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG Macro HSM II review: Digital Photography Review

If it was me I would go for the excellent optical quality of the Tamron, over the only decent optical quality of the Sigma.

But, if you want to make the fewest overall lens performance compromises, get the Canon.
Canon EF 70-200mm 1:2.8 L IS USM review: Digital Photography Review

 

[ann]

Is it possible to go into your local camera store, and test them out?

Even with research I want to put them to a real test in the store.

 

[runnah]

Tamron everyday of the week. I have a sigma 70-300 and honestly it's terrible. I could write a book in the time it takes to focus and still most of the time it's soft.

 

[Derrel]

I watched "That Nikon Guy's" video channel a while back, and the host, Matt granger, compared three 70-200's. The Tamron is the lightest as I recall, AND focuses much closer than the Sigma. It has been a while since that Tamron was introduced, but when it was, I saw some samples that had what I thought was impressive, smooth bokeh rendering.

 

[Woodsman]

I too have the Sigma and agree with Runnah. Soft and the focus is terrible often trying multiple time to lock on in auto focus.

 

[table1349]

Good place to review the opinions of owners of the lenses you are looking at. FM Reviews -

 

[KmH]

I too have the Sigma and agree with Runnah. Soft and the focus is terrible often trying multiple time to lock on in auto focus.

The AF module is in the camera, not the lens, so focus hunting is often caused by issues not related to the lens. Soft focus however can result from compromises made in zoom lens design and relaxing the materials specifications, tolerances, and precision used in figuring the lens elements to keep lens cost down.

Third party lens electronics and lens-to-camera communication protocols have to be reverse engineered.

Camera maker lenses usually cost more because they use better materials, closer tolerances, and more precise lens element figuring.

 

[RichieT]

I have several Sigma lenses for my nikons and most of them are very sharp. The 150 -500 is a little soft at the extremes but that's to be expected for the price. My 17-50 2.8 became my favorite walking around lens on my D300. The only lens I had a problem with was their 70-200 2.8 which front focused badly. They did correct the problem quickly. The way it was explained to me was that Nikon, Canon, and Sony have very tight Quality Control which makes for a consistent product. It also means they reject a lot of lenses and that raises the price of their good lenses. The third parties have a wider acceptable level of QC which keeps prices down since they don't reject as many lenses. It winds up that you can have a noticeable difference in a "high" acceptable lens and a "low" acceptable lens. The trick is to find a place that lets you test the lenses on your camera before you buy. One thing I hate about them though, is that after you auto-focus, you can't manually adjust focus unless you switch the lens to manual. I still grab the focus ring to touch up like I do on my Nikon lenses only to hear plastic grind.Yikes!!

 

[C4n0n.Fan]

Thanks everyone I've been able to have a look at some of the reviews on the sites mentioned (thanks for the links) Only a couple of shops actually carries both brands in this town, but would you believe never both types at the same shop! I might just have to look at one from one store then another from another store. I reckon your right about the AF module KmH and I'm interested to see how the Tamron goes with the my 7D. My 17-50 f2.8 is my fav as well RichieT Which 70-200m are you talking about? with vc or without? By the way everyone I was meaning both brands WITH some sort of vibration, stabilisation control. I have heard they are a lot better than the ones without and not just for their particular capability in lower light.

 

[RichieT]

I have the older one, without vibration control.

 

[Smokeyr67]

Tamron everyday of the week. I have a sigma 70-300 and honestly it's terrible. I could write a book in the time it takes to focus and still most of the time it's soft.

Apples and Oranges, the 70 to 200 in both brands work well

 

[Mvrn78]

Sorry C4non.fan for take your topic, i have saw the Matt granger review of that three lenses and saw this to
i know this lens don´t go down to 2.8 but it´s more cheaper
What is de difference between the other three lenses witch are fixed zoom and this last one that is extensible zoom?
I also looked at tamron 2.8 but i can only use with tripod because a shake a bit of my hands and she didn´t have the OS, i´m very confused about witch one to buy the other two nikkor and sigma are that awesome lenses but they it more expensive to

 

[pixmedic]

I have the tamron 70-200 f/2.8 and love it! (non VR)
it has the focus motor built into the lens. focus is FAST, and image quality has been good.
the vibration control version was impressive as well, and i could take pictures handheld at 1/25 without getting motion blur from camera shake.

 

[Mvrn78]

Thanks pixmedic, i liked of that tamron to, my only concern is to shake of my hands (because my nervous system) and blur the image
I´m realy a noob on this what is better, the fixed zoom lenses or that extensible zoom