Tamron v Sigma 70-300

Ben Hur

Ben Hur

Suspended / Banned
Messages
476
Name
Adey
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all

I am a D50 owner with the 18-55mm and 55-200mm kit lenses, which I am very happy with as it is all I have anyway, but I would like a bit of extra length and the 1:2 macro option. Would anyone be able to tell me which of the two is better between 200mm and 300mm, and macro setting, or any advice on alternative solutions. I am very limited by budget and am an enthusiast just looking to take as decent standard of shots as possible, not professional quality.

Regards
 
Ben Hur said:
Hi all

I am a D50 owner with the 18-55mm and 55-200mm kit lenses, which I am very happy with as it is all I have anyway, but I would like a bit of extra length and the 1:2 macro option. Would anyone be able to tell me which of the two is better between 200mm and 300mm, and macro setting, or any advice on alternative solutions. I am very limited by budget and am an enthusiast just looking to take as decent standard of shots as possible, not professional quality.

Regards
Click to expand...

Tough question!

I've never owned a Tamron, but the Sigmas i have had have been great........ I'm not clear on i) how much you want to spend or ii) what you really want from the lens - reach or macro. I wouldn't be too fussed with a 1:2 macro tbh......
 
Hi Ben.

Me and my mate had this argument a few months ago. Like yourself, we too are both D50 owners.

After trawling round countless number of shops and searching the web for various reviews, the main conclusion was that there is very very little difference between the 2 lenses.

I went for the Tamron lens and my mate went for the Sigma. Personally, I think the Tamron lens feels a little more rugged. It's easy to handle and has a nice rubber grip - kind of feels a bit tougher than the Sigma. May be worth considering if you think it may take a few knocks.

Image wise - there's no difference at all, in my opinion. They both have the same zoom capabilities, apertures are identical as is the macro setting.

If I remember rightly, the price was almost identical too.

Hope that helps you a bit.

Anth.
www.ajbphotos.co.uk
 
Hi Anth

Thanks for your input, the Tamron is £30 cheaper, which is quite a lot to me, especially if there is not that much between the quality.

Thanks again
 
Hi Joe

The reviews I have read suggest that the Sigma APO is not that hot between 200 and 300mm anyway, which is where I'm looking for the extra length.

From camera price buster:
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG MACRO £85
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG MACRO £145
Tamron 70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD Macro £115

Nikon AF-S 70-300mm VR £329 :(
Tamron 90mm Di Macro 1:1 f2.8 £260 :(

Unfortunately, when you live on disability, every penny counts and you are basically stuck at the lower end of the market :bang:
 
Ben Hur said:
Hi Joe

The reviews I have read suggest that the Sigma APO is not that hot between 200 and 300mm anyway, which is where I'm looking for the extra length.

From camera price buster:
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG MACRO £85
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG MACRO £145
Tamron 70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD Macro £115

Nikon AF-S 70-300mm VR £329 :(
Tamron 90mm Di Macro 1:1 f2.8 £260 :(

Unfortunately, when you live on disability, every penny counts and you are basically stuck at the lower end of the market :bang:
Click to expand...

I have the sigma none apo verson on my D50, its ok but suffers a bit from purple fringing. I'm looking to replace it soon, hopefully with the nikon 70-300 vr. I can post some example pics if you like, I'm in work at the mo but can do it when I get home :) .
 
I´ve got the non apo version.. well didn´t need it so sold it on ebay.. payment hasn´t been received tho so i still have it.. It´s decent to be fair but I don´t really need a zoom at the moment and i´ve got a nikon 70-210 as well..
 
I have both the Sigma (not APO) and Tamron 70-300 lenses (I bought the Tamron to replace the Sigma, but then found the Tamron wouldn't work with my film camera!).
I have only used the Tamron once and found it to be rather slow at focussing - it tends to hunt around alot in Autofocus mode. Image quality - I haven't really noticed that much difference between the two to be honest. As for the macro function - I don't use it as you need to be about a mile away from the subject, and without using a tripod, I stand no chance of getting a decent blur free shot.
 
Thanks all for your input.

Regards
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top