Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 9, 2008, 8:29 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 627
Default


Tamron: SP AF70-200mm F/2.8 Di



http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/70200_di.asp



Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG MACRO HSM



http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3316&navigator=3

If you had these two options for a 70-200 mm lens (2.8 all the way thru) and the two are similarly priced, which would you choose and why.

Thanks






FaithfulPastor is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 9, 2008, 9:44 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Marc H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 130
Default

I would choose (i actually own) the Sigma. The AF on the sigma is much faster, wich is important for sports.
Marc H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2008, 9:45 AM   #3
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

By most accounts:

The Tamron is sharper. The sigma is slightly better build quality and faster focusing.

If you're doing sports work the focus speed is critical so the sigma gets the nod. If you're doing wildlife, 200mm is too short so neither lens is a good solution. Beyond those 2 uses, focus speed simply isn't as relevant so to me the Tamron would get the edge because it's the sharper lens.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2008, 10:46 AM   #4
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,545
Default

JohnG wrote:
Quote:
If you're doing sports work the focus speed is critical so the sigma gets the nod. If you're doing wildlife, 200mm is too short so neither lens is a good solution.
In which case a Sigma 100-300 f/4 will be most the most preferable... with HSM too!

-> When you don't require f/2.8 this 100-300 f/4 EX is a lot sharper than any 70-200 f/2.8 with TC ($ wise too), so sharp in fact that it will exceed the MTF on both Nikon and Canon 300mm f/4 primes, but is a zoom and will take a 1.4x for a 420mm reach
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2008, 11:12 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 627
Default

Anything to the rumor that the Sigmas have trouble with autofocus? Or more trouble than Tamron or Canon?
FaithfulPastor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2008, 11:18 AM   #6
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

FaithfulPastor wrote:
Quote:
Anything to the rumor that the Sigmas have trouble with autofocus? Or more trouble than Tamron or Canon?
I've never heard that rumor - especially not applied to their EX lineup.

I will say I used a sigma 70-200 2.8 for years. In image quality and focus performance I would rate it at 90% of what the canon 70-200 2.8 is. no doubt the canon IS a better lens from my experience. But it really comes down to whether that 10% is worth the extra money. As a sports photographer I was using the lens in demanding situations - 200mm, f2.8 with fast moving subjects. So there came a time when it was worth it to get the extra 10% the canon could give.

But I've never heard of any third party lens focusing better than the sigma EX lenses.


JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2008, 12:44 PM   #7
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,545
Default

FaithfulPastor wrote:
Quote:
Anything to the rumor that the Sigmas have trouble with autofocus? Or more trouble than Tamron or Canon?
FYI - Sigma makes one of the sharpest lens used by well-known oufits to test top-end cameras:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=30286719
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2008, 7:34 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 627
Default

In a world where we worry about good, better and best, my personal biggest worry is making a big mistake. ':?'

From what I'm reading here, neither lens would be a mistake. It's hair splitting, one is a little sharper, one's a little faster. Neither is s.........l...........o...........w, both are sharp lenses.

Thanks for the assurance that I'm not making a mistake.

I got to play with both a little today.

How about uno mas?

I have a 2x that will cost me 1 f stop. If I decide to use that 2x (say for wild life) in connection with this lens, that would give me 400x plus what my XSi camera body give me. Do you think I'll have AF problems with arrangement or no problems at all........because it simply won't work:-)

Thanks and I look forward to hearing from you guys....you're knowledge base blows me away everytime I ask a question.
FaithfulPastor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2008, 7:59 PM   #9
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

First off - a 2x TC will cost you 2 stops not one. If you were using a 1.4x TC you would only lose 1 stop. So that 2.8 lens will become 5.6. Yes, you'll have slower focus performance and you'll absolutely lose sharpness.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2008, 8:08 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 627
Default

So you're quoting the philosopher Donnie Brasco:
"Forget about it"......

Message received. Have a good one.
FaithfulPastor is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:40 AM.