Sigma or Tamron?

mrbez

mrbez

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,034
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi guys,

Which of these two brands are generally better for the Canon, or am I opening a can of worms with this?
 
You have to judge on a lens by lens basis really. The Sigma 50mm 1.4 for example is a suberb lens. Likewise the Tamron 17-50 2.8.
 
Must admit I have a couple of siggys and a cheaper Tamron
The tamron is ok for the money, the siggys are better but were also at least twice the price:D

I think it certainly depends on the lens:thumbs:
 
iStock_can20of20worms.jpg
 
Both are great with certain things. Tamron 17-50, 90 macro, 70-200 great but you'll curse the slower focus. Finally they're getting in on the ultrasonic ring act..

Sigma 70-200 HSM, 50 and some of the longer stuff. I've always rated Sigma but I've just had my first bad experience of QC - which I only ever thought might be forum hysteria..

No generalisations work here - lens models are best assessed individually. If manual focus is an option, then consider 4 more manufacturers - Zeiss, Voigtlander, Samyang and Leica. There are gems there.
 
Lazlo Woodbine said:
You have to judge on a lens by lens basis really. The Sigma 50mm 1.4 for example is a suberb lens. Likewise the Tamron 17-50 2.8.
Click to expand...

What he said.

Tamron 10-24 vs Sigma 10-20 = Sigma win.
Sigma 70-300 OS vs new Tamron 70-300 VC = Tamron win.

What sort of lens are you after?
 
Mainly a walk about lens.

I hired a canon 17-55 2.8, but I can not afford one of those, so I am thinking Tamron 17-50 2.8?
 
MrCraigBerry said:
Mainly a walk about lens.

I hired a canon 17-55 2.8, but I can not afford one of those, so I am thinking Tamron 17-50 2.8?
Click to expand...

I have one of those, its generally accepted to be an excellent lens.
 
Experience over the years has taught me that Tamron QC seems to be consistent, Sigma's isn't.

Tamron apparently so I heard supply the parts for some of the Nikkors, it wouldn't surprise me.

I can put up with non USM AF when the lens is as good and sharp as the 17-50 F2.8, especially at its price point!
 
iancandler said:
Experience over the years has taught me that Tamron QC seems to be consistent, Sigma's isn't.

Tamron apparently so I heard supply the parts for some of the Nikkors, it wouldn't surprise me.

I can put up with non USM AF when the lens is as good and sharp as the 17-50 F2.8, especially at its price point!
Click to expand...

I've got 4 good sigmas, maybe I'm blessed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top