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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 14, 2003, 7:05 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 332
Default Sigma VS Tamron Lenses

I am using a Tamron 28-300 3.5 XR LD travel lens on a Canon Rebel 300D with very good results, very satisfied. I want to get a 2.8 lens for lowlight shots. On B&H, Sigma has a 2.8 24-75 and Tamron has 28-75 2.8 lens. I know and like Tamron lens, but would like to have the 24 mm offered by the Sigma. What's opinions on Tamron VS. Sigma lenses? Any difference? THX.
fporch is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 14, 2003, 10:13 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
ohenry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,676
Default

I can give high praise of the Tamron 28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di lens. I've had mine for about a month now and am very satisfied with the sharpness of the images, the speed of the focusing, and the overall build quality.
ohenry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2003, 2:31 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 332
Default

THX ohenry - how are the low light images coming out and it is this lens fast in low light?
fporch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2003, 4:19 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
ohenry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,676
Default

I'm not quite sure what you're asking. A lens' speed is measured by the largest aperature, so a f/2.8 lens is faster than a f/4.0. But either lens may take a great picture in low light situations; one just requires a slower shutter speed.
ohenry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2003, 8:52 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 332
Default

I guess the question I'm asking is will I see a noticable difference in shutter speed between the Tamron 3.5 28-300 and a Tamron 2.8 28-75 or Sigma 24-75. My thought in adding the a 2.8 to my bag is it will ofer better exposure in low light. My other question is the if there is any quality difference between Sigma and Tamron lenses on a Canon body. THX.
fporch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2003, 10:32 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
ohenry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,676
Default

ahhh...gotcha.

for every stop decrease in aperature, you get a corresponding stop increase in shutter speed (and vice versa). The difference between 2.8 and 3.5 is about 2/3 of a stop, so you could expect a 2/3 stop faster shutter speed. But then again, you have to ask yourself how often you are going to be shooting at wide open aperature. I don't think 2/3 of a stop will make that significant of an issue unless you find yourself continually shooting handheld shots in low light conditions. You can get much better results putting the camera on the tripod, then it doesn't make a hill of beans whether you shoot at 60 seconds or 6 seconds AND you can choose the aperature you want to achieve the effects you want.

Regarding Sigma vs Tamron, I defer you to the following url for a comparison of several lenses that may interest you.

http://www.photozone.de/2equipment/easytxt.htm


You may find the 24mm wide angle more favorable to you than the extra 2/3 of a stop in aperature. All depends on what you're shooting and what other lenses you carry.

Good luck...and report back to us with feedback on whichever lens you chose and how it works for you.
ohenry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2003, 7:31 AM   #7
Moderator
 
Frank Doorhof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,320
Default

Hi,

I use the new Tamron 28-75 XR Di modelA09 and some.....
I compared it in the store with some Sigma EX versions and the Tamron was really a WHOLE other league.

On the net they even compared it to the L version of Canon and the Tamron was slightly better in picture quality (sharpness/color).

I don't have L-lenses but I can say that the Tamron 28-75 performs evenly well as my Sigma 70-210 f2.8 APO which is razor razor sharp.

I also own a Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro lens which is also superb.

Another canditate would be the Tokina Pro in that range, on photozone at the moment above the Tamron which only appeared on the list since this week I believe.

I would test out the Tokina and Tamron, the Sigma in this case can be left untested that difference was really huge.

Greetings,
Frank
Frank Doorhof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2003, 1:41 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 332
Default

This is very helpful folks, THX. I do regularly shoot lowlight handheld. I have a tripod, but find I often don't have the time or inclination to set it up. I will report back after I study up on this site and make a decision. THX.
fporch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2003, 5:30 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 332
Default

A photographer my company hires for jobs suggested a 50 mm 1.4 lens for handheld low light shots. Canon has an AF model for around $300. Anyone have any experience with this lens? THX
fporch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2003, 11:00 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

I have the 50 F1.8.

The f1.4 is a very good lens. Personally, the 50 f1.8 is about 50 bucks and is also very good optically. There are differences:

The f1.4 is made of metal, the f1.8 is plastic.

The f1.4 has USM, the f1.8 doesn't. Therefor the f1.4 will focus a lot faster. Personally, I don't find the f1.8 very slow.

For some these matters. For others, they don't. I don't expect to be in many situations where the lens is in danger, so I got the f1.8. If it breaks I can buy many more before being out money. And optically, it's good enough for me.

The f1.4 version might be what you need, but it might be overkill. Only you can decide.

Eric
eric s 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 8:41 AM.