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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 27, 2006, 11:11 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
big_potato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 487
Default

Nikkor VR 18-200mm

vs

Tamron XR Di II 18-200mm


Besides VR vs non-VR, any other comments?


Want a "Single-Lens-Shoot-Everywhere".


Thx!
big_potato is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 27, 2006, 12:37 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 108
Default

I have read that Sigma 18-200 is better than the Tamron 18-200,
and Nikon 18-200 should be better or as good as Sigma and it has faster AF.
So if i had to choose between Nikon and Tamron 18-200, i would definitely buy the Nikkor.
Shred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 27, 2006, 12:41 PM   #3
DBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,483
Default

Shred wrote:
Quote:
I have read that Sigma 18-200 is better than the Tamron 18-200,
and Nikon 18-200 should be better or as good as Sigma and it has faster AF.
So if i had to choose between Nikon and Tamron 18-200, i would definitely buy the Nikkor.
I know nothing about ANY of these lenses... I must therefore be an expert.:G Why else would I comment?

All things being equal, Nikon makes a better lens then either Tamron or Sigma. But all things are NOT equal, and some of the Tamron and Sigmas ARE better then their Nikon equivalents.

Get a review of the lenses in question. Tamron and Sigma make quality gear and at quite a savings. Their equivalents might very well surprise you.

Dave
DBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2006, 10:59 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
big_potato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 487
Default

Thanks Shred & Dave for your detailed opinions!

To be honest, I am trying the Tamron already, borrowed from my brother. And quite satisfied with it's image quality and performance.

But just wondering if the original Nikkor would be even better.

In prices in Hongkong are about Nikkor ~ $700 (but out of stock) and Tamron $400.

Also the Nikkor is about 100g heavier.

If Sigma price is about the same as Tamron, I would tend to try it as well, so I won't overlap with my brother's inventory.

I heard that Sigma is a bit on the "soft" side and yellow-biaed i.e. better for portrait.

I really have to think again if I intend to shoot sceneries or portraits more .....???

Thanks again!
big_potato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2006, 11:13 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Buzzsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,274
Default

With less expensive lenses you will get more "chromatic aberation", I understand that this can be cleaned up pretty well in PS if shot in RAW, but time consuming. If you have the money, get the Nikkor.
Buzzsaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2006, 11:41 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
big_potato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 487
Default

Did you mean the ED (extra low dispersion) technology of Nikkor, is missing from both Tamron & Sigma?
big_potato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2006, 1:01 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 108
Default

My Tamron VS Sigma opinion was based on this thread at DCresource.
Dont know how reliable test it is but it's on interenet so it must be true :G


Before christmas i had Nikkor 18-200 ordered but they didn't have anyting to sell and i got tired on waiting.
So i decided to do things in expensive way and ended up buying buch of more or less expensive lenses.
Now i have Tokina 12-24mm f4, Tamron 28-75mm f2.8, Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 and an empty wallet.
In the future i still may buy the 18-200 nikkor because it and D50 would be ideal combo when traveling light.

Shred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2006, 10:57 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
The Winemaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 126
Default

I borrowed a friend's Nikon D100 and used it with my Tamron 28-200 XR (IF) Macro Zoom lens that I normally have attached to my Nikon F3. I was very pleased with the results of the lens, and not so pleased with the results of the Nikon D100. To me I had to shoot at +.7 EV or even +1.0 EV to get some snap in the pictures. He had dust on his sensor and it really showed on the underxposed shots. Later he told me that he shoots all his shots at +1 EV because of the dullness of the colors and brightness.

Tamron has made a great deal of lenses for other major lens manufacturers, even in the Medium Format field. Their lenses have won awards of merit and they use special aspheric hybrid lens designs in the lenses they create. They have one that has a 2.8 aperture all the way through the zoom and that would be very nice. I believe it is the 28-75mm lens and that should give a good overall for most picture taking.

How about a Michigan iceberg that came to shore on the East side of Lake Michigan? This is about 4 miles from where I live (I live in the SW part of Michigan). I like the colors and richness of the lens.


Attached Images
 
The Winemaker 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 9:33 AM.