Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/)
-   Nikon Lenses (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/nikon-lenses-62/)
-   -   [Recovered Thread: 87489] (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/nikon-lenses-62/%5Brecovered-thread-87489%5D-85393/)

big_potato Apr 12, 2006 10:09 AM

Sorry, in fact, I am "using" Tamron 18-200mm already (borrowed from my brother for indefinite period).

My comments comparing with Nikkor were purely based on paper specs.

I really have NO experience with Sigma.

But I did read some reviews comparing Tamron vs Sigma in magazines.

In general, they said Sigma has higher resolution at the tele-end. But the aperture is narrower also at that end (by 1 f-stop ???). And Sigma is yellow-biased vs Tamron is blue-biased, and therefore they said Sigma may be more natural for human portrait (especially for we Chinese, the "yellow" people :) ) )

kassandro Apr 12, 2006 3:18 PM

JimC wrote:
Quote:

SilentBob wrote:
Quote:

In addition to slow AF times, and a frustrating tendancy to hunt for focus, it also came to light from several sources that the lenses actually only actually zoom to around 160mm vs. the advertised 200mm..
Tell your "sources" to check again, with the lenses focused to infinity. :-)

If you focus on something closer, it's not uncommon to see a wider angle of view than you should have with many lenses, since the focal length can change with focus point, especially in some of the newer compact lens designs.

So, when someone compares lenses and notices one appears to be wider than another at the same focal length settings, this kind of information gets spread around the forums.

If you focus on something further away, the focal length will be very close to what is advertised.

For all lenses the focal length changes somewhat, when the focus changes. However, for lenses with internal focusing this phenomenon ismuch stronger than with a more traditional lense design. On the other hand with internal focusing you can use flower shaped lense hoodsfor better protection against flare. Also it is much easier to use a pol filter. Finally the autofocus of a lense with internal focusing is usually faster than that of a similar lense with a traditional design.

zygh Apr 14, 2006 6:05 PM

Well, my choice was Sigma 18-200. I also got 3 macro add-on lenses and a Hama UV filter.

mtclimber Apr 14, 2006 10:59 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Zygh-

Congratulations on the Sigma 18-200mm lens. Following up on our previous exchange concerning the Tamron 28-300mm XD Di lens. The lens arrived today and here is the first shot.

MT

zygh Apr 15, 2006 3:23 AM

thanks, mtclimber. congratulations on your tamron 28-300, as well. i decided on the sigma 18-200 thinking that i needed wide more than tele and that 450mm (35mm eguiv.) on the tamron/sigma 28-300 was going to result in shaky pictures without vibration reduction and/or in low light conditions.

can you post pictures in low light condition without blitz and, if possible, both at 28 and at 300? thanks.

cheers!

mtclimber Apr 16, 2006 5:28 PM

Zygh-

It raining here today so these were taken inside. The first image is the Tamron 28-300mm XR Di at 28mm. The exposure is 1/80 at F 6.3 and the image is cropped to 100%. The second image is the Tamron 28-300mm at 300mm. The exposure is 1/25 at F 6.3 and the image is cropped 100%. The third image is made with the Sigma 30mm F 1.4. The exposure, with fill flash, was 1/500 at F 4.0 and the image was cropped 100%.

MT

http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e2...041606D-50.jpg

http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e2...041606D-50.jpg

http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e2...0mm100crop.jpg

mtclimber Apr 18, 2006 1:27 PM

Zygh-

I received delivery on my Tamron 18-200 XR Di II lens this morning. So far it looks excellent, quite like the 28-300 XD Di. Here are two sample photos taken from the same position. The first is taken at the 18mm setting and the second at the 200mm setting. This could be an ideal walk around lens offering both a creditable wide angle setting and a moderate zoom.

MT

http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e2...411806D-50.jpg

http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e2...411806D-50.jpg

zygh Apr 18, 2006 3:34 PM

mtclimber, why would you get both the tamron 18-200AND the 28-300? :?

i personally went for the sigma 18-200 both because of my limited budgetand my previous addiction from the fz30 of havingwide and tele in the same lens.

i don't know what to say but if i were you i would have got a 100-400 in the place of the 28-300. but that's just me.

anyway, lately i've been looking at the panny lc1 and came to the conclusion that that was/is an absolutely beautiful camera. i'm sorta hoping that the new l1 won't cost so much. mimicking the design of the lc1, the l1 is also a gorgeous camera. speaking of my tastes only, that's the way i'd like to see an dslr look. :roll:

mtclimber Apr 18, 2006 4:03 PM

1 Attachment(s)
zygh-

You are correct that there is some overlap in the two lenses. If the Tamron 18-200mm XR Di II lens proves to be a true walk around lens, I will sell the 28-300mm XR Di. Here is another sample from the Tamron 18-200mm XR Di II lens at 200mm taken through a window.

MT

mtclimber Apr 18, 2006 6:16 PM

1 Attachment(s)
zygh-

Here is another Tamron 18-200mm XR Di II sample for you. It is also at 200mm and taken through a windows.

MT


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:22 AM.