18-200, Tamron/Sigma vs Nikon - Do you really get only what you pay for?

[Halfcharged]

So I've always been keen to stay away from non-nikon lenses. However, money's tight, times are hard and all that.

My main zoom lens is an 18-105mm (DX obviously). For the most part it's pretty good. But I could do with a bit more length. I have a 55-200, but it isn't very good (I got it 5 years ago with my first DSLR, it doesn't have VR, the distortion is terrible and it seems to make everything look a bit milky and washed out), and besides that I hate carrying and changing lenses unless I really have to. I usually like to take 1 prime and 1 zoom out with me. I begrudge taking more, so I thought about flogging the two zooms, and getting an 18-200, or thereabouts.

I note that equivalent Tamron and Sigma lenses are MUCH cheaper, and the trouble is with reviews that they vary wildly depending which ones you look at. My go-to for reviews (Ken Rockwell) just says to stay away from anything that isn't Nikon. While I understand why this might be, he probably earns more than I do and maybe doesn't understand why someone would want to go "generic"...

I'm currently using a Nikon D7000. I'll be keeping it for a while, although if I'm honest, I do see FX somewhere in my future. I work in telly so I'm quite aware that the camera is only as good as the glass on the front, but is cheaper glass ALWAYS that bad?

SO MY QUESTION - what's the general consensus on alternative brands. I've seen some people's work on here using them, and it looks ok to me...

 

[strumstrum]

My go-to for reviews (Ken Rockwell) just says to stay away from anything that isn't Nikon.

and you first issue is...........

brand aside I have always had issues with cover all zooms as they have been uninspiring at both the wide and tele ends, the only one I really REALLY enjoyed was the Tamron 18-270 PZD but you are looking at £300 odd for one.

 

[Halfcharged]

and you first issue is...........

brand aside I have always had issues with cover all zooms as they have been uninspiring at both the wide and tele ends, the only one I really REALLY enjoyed was the Tamron 18-270 PZD but you are looking at £300 odd for one.

Thanks - I will check that out.

I understand what you're saying re the extreme ends of a zoom. I much prefer using my prime lenses when I can. However it really comes down to practicality. I do a lot of motorcycle touring and I travel a great deal for work with hand luggage only. I only ever have space (and the inclination to carry) a maximum of two lenses, so if one's a prime, the zoom has to be everything else that the prime isn't.

Having never bought or tried a Tamron lens I know nothing about them. What part of the model number indicates whether the image circle is only big enough for DX sensors? And what was it about the 18-270 that you particularly liked?

 

[pingu666]

best to take ken with a pinch of salt, i remmber him having a sony minolta hate phase, then liking them, then going back to hating them, saying whatever plastic pos base level canikon was better than anything sony has ever made.... which is rather wrong... by along way.

the 18 270 is fairly good, my dad bought one. id say check dyxum for reviews and user experience

 

[frankcanon]

I have a SIGMA 18-250 am really pleased with it, together with the SIGMA 159-500, my most used, despite having a number of CANON L lenses, although the 18-250 won't work on the full frame camera. Really good value for everyday use.

 

[StewartR]

Having never bought or tried a Tamron lens I know nothing about them. What part of the model number indicates whether the image circle is only big enough for DX sensors?

Tamron terminology:

Di = "digitally integrated"; the lens has coatings on its internal elements to reduce internal reflections, so it's suitable for digital cameras.

Di-II = as above but with a smaller image circle for DX/APS-C sensors.

 

[Pookeyhead]

My go-to for reviews (Ken Rockwell)

There's your problem right there. Anyone who tells you automatically to always get Nikkor lenses is an idiot, as there are some truly terrible Nikkor lenses




There are some great Tamron and Sigma lenses, and some bloody awful Nikkor lenses.


Ask people... then measure what you hear against a decent lens test. The problem with just asking people is the risk of people automatically recommending what they have. Far too many people are not actually honest, and will talk a product up just because they have one themselves.

DxO are well respected.... http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Ratings

However, I find the most consistent lens tests that always match my own findings are http://www.photozone.de/all-tests

 

[Nod]

Had an 18-270 Tamron which I bought as a leave it on lens for a V1/FT-1 I have. Unfortunately it didn't work at all (although I did on a D70) so I traded it in against a Nikkor 18-200 which has a little less reach but does work on the camera it was bought for. Had several other Sigmas and Tamrons with no issues at all.

 

[Halfcharged]

Thank you for the links and info there everyone. @pingu666 I take your point about Ken Rockwell. I have spent quite a lot of time on his site, and while he has some good stuff to say, I have noticed some glaring inconsistencies, depending on when the page in question was last updated!

It would be great if there were shops that actually let you take these lenses away for a day before buying them. I went to B&H in New York not too many months ago and they have every brand and model of lens you could possibly imagine to try out there, but taking pictures of the person at the till next to you I find tells you pretty much nothing.

Like anything there is a large element of subjectivity in it I suppose. There will be some that say anything "aftermarket" is rubbish, but define rubbish really. My "photographic eye" has many years worth of developing to do yet, so I will probably only just notice an issue that someone else might think is huge. Then there will be others who might see that issue as a characteristic rather than a fault.

At any rate I'll certainly check out those review sites @Pookeyhead and see what their verdict is. However, ultimately I think it'll very much end up being a bit of a "suck it and see" type scenario. That is, I'll buy it second-hand, carry it around for a few weeks, and if I don't like it I'll put it back on ebay. Watch this space...

 

[pingu666]

one nice thing about the tamron is the 5 year warrenty, and sigma are doing 3 years now, and theres the mount change service for £35ish

i find dyxum reviews (average them in your mind) to be decent.

one other option might be a bridge camera, tried the leica(!) one today and its crazy lightweight 845 grams, but felt alot less