Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 26, 2011, 1:23 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

I agree with JimC about not needing the optical image stabilization in Sigma lenses.

BTW, the Tamron 55-200 and the Sony 55-200 are the same lens with a couple minor distinctions.
  1. The Sony SAL-55200/2 has it's own SAM AF motor, while the Tamron works off the AF motor in the camera body.
  2. The Tamron is cheaper and has a longer warranty.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2011, 2:26 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
lakensea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Bar Harbor, Maine
Posts: 101
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
I agree with JimC about not needing the optical image stabilization in Sigma lenses.


BTW, the Tamron 55-200 and the Sony 55-200 are the same lens with a couple minor distinctions.
  1. The Sony SAL-55200/2 has it's own SAM AF motor, while the Tamron works off the AF motor in the camera body.
  2. The Tamron is cheaper and has a longer warranty.
Of those two, which would you say would focus faster, and which would have better image quality?
lakensea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2011, 2:32 PM   #13
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Personally, when choosing between similar lenses, I would always opt for the camera manufacturer's lens, all else being equal, as it would likely be better supported in current and future camera offerings (for example, focus accuracy and unique features like the new lens Shading, CA and Distortion correction features in the A65/A77 models); as well as lens coatings that should be more consistent between lens models for use with custom WB settings if you stick with the same lens brand.

I have not seen any focus speed comparisons between the two. But, if I were choosing between them, I'd go with the Sony model.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2011, 2:45 PM   #14
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

BTW, I'm a Tamron fan, and have multiple Tamron lenses I use with my A700.

But, I've seen too many posts about focus errors using some Tamron lenses that should be virtually identical to their Sony equivalents (for example, front focus with some of the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 lenses when Sony 28-75mm f/2.8 lenses worked fine on the same camera bodies).

So, I would lean towards the camera manufacturers' lenses when comparing two similar models. The camera manufacturer is usually going to take steps to insure their own lenses work correctly and are optimized for their own camera bodies.

With third party lenses, you're taking your chances on the support available from the third party manufacturer, which is trying to make sure their lenses work with a variety of different camera brands, versus being optimized for a specific camera brand. So, if/when they get it "wrong", a lens may need to go back to the manufacturer for rechipping/recalibration, and you're less likely to have those types of issues with a lens offered by the camera manufacturer.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2011, 8:46 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 262
Default

Guys, what do you think about the Tamron 18-200 macro? It's half the price and currently has a rebate.
Outhouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2011, 5:27 AM   #16
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

It's half the price for a reason (the 18-250mm is a much better lens).
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2011, 5:53 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Yeah. That.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2011, 5:56 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

See:

Sony 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DT SAL-18250 (Tested)

Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di II LD Aspherical IF AF (Tested)

... and, for that matter, ...

Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD AF (Tested)

Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM (Tested)
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 29, 2012, 1:59 PM   #19
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 2
Default

I'm sorry for reviving this old thread but I'm also in the market for the "All in One Lens" and I'm debating on:

4. Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II PZD LD Aspherical IF Macro Zoom Lens with Built in Motor for Sony DSLR Cameras - $649

5. Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM IF Lens for Sony Digital SLR Cameras - $479

6. Sony SAL18250 Alpha DT 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 High Magnification Zoom Lens w/Lens Hood - $648

or even

7. Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) Macro Ultra Zoom Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras - $419

I'm a beginner in DSLR and I have a Sony A33 and I currently use the camera only when I'm on tourist travel, nothing professional or fancy shooting. I do love to shoot landscape that is why I wanted a high zoom lense and also like to shoot macro shots like flowers, foods & etc... and also of course love to take portrait and candid shots also. And so I'd love to carry only 1 lens for all this and would appreciate anyone's suggestions. I've read the reviews and they all said each of the lens are good even though being a beginner myself and I don't understand some of the terms, I wish there's a comparison review between them or a review that pertains the lenses and my Sony A33 camera and so I'm still debating. Thank you.
edtorious is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 29, 2012, 2:10 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 262
Default

I was the instigator of this thread originally. I bought a used Tamron 18-250 and its been fine. I believe it is slightly higher rated than the 18-270 on Dyxum.

My walk around lens is the Tamron 18-50 2.8 and it is a very good lens. I now want to buy a good prime lens plus after visiting Cades Cove in the Smokies, I really want something with more reach. I would love the Sony 7-400 G lens but its out of my price range. I am pondering the Tamron 200-500.

Before you buy, give KEH.com a look along with B&H's used lenses. My 18-250 looked brand new and I think I paid about $250 for it.
Outhouse 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 11:34 PM.