A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Nikon > Third-party Lenses > Sigma 70 - 200 f/2.8 vs....

Sigma 70 - 200 f/2.8 vs. Tamron 70 - 200 f/2.8

Jose Rivera , Jul 17, 2008; 02:15 a.m.

Just purchased the Sigma after a long debate about saving up for the Nikon (business has been slow). Saw the tamron for $700 and thought it was a great deal. Read up on dpreview.com and other places. But when I tested it the colors were a bit off (for my taste).

The Sigma was much better ($100 more). I shoot with the D80 and D300 and found the Sigma worked much better. Of course the Nikon would be perfect. Now for the question...

Would you choose the Sigma or the Tamron? Why?


    1   |   2     Next    Last

Elliot Bernstein , Jul 17, 2008; 07:12 a.m.

Since you state the Sigma was better, why would you even question what choice to make? Isn't it obvious?

FWIW, you can probably adjust the camera's settings to get pretty much identical colors between the two lenses.

Dan Brown , Jul 17, 2008; 09:33 a.m.

Thanks for positng this. I had heard elsewhere in the Net that the Tamron had better IQ, so there may be some sample variation going on here.

If I were testing the two, I'd rack them out to 200mm, f2.8 shoot from a tripod and study corner sharpness and chromatic aberations. Then I'd play around with the autofocus an various dynamic situations and try to get a sense of their differences.

BTW, how do you compare handling between the two. Mostly with respect to the zoom ring location, size and feel.


Tim Knight , Jul 17, 2008; 10:29 a.m.

I have a friend who shoots all sports indoor and outdoor, band, and show chior. He uses the Sigma 70-200 on a Canon. Here is his site if you want to study the quality of the pictures. http://mit.midco.net/prairiestorm/SportsPGS/Basketball.html

Justin NGO , Jul 17, 2008; 10:54 a.m.

".....Saw the tamron for $700 and thought it was a great deal. Read up on dpreview.com and other places. But when I tested it the colors were a bit off (for my taste)."

I don't think so with my copy. Great colors and sharpness. You may want to take a look at my new Tamron 70-200 (Nikon mount): http://www.flickr.com/photos/huytuong/sets/72157605955363658/

Have funs!

Tim Knight , Jul 17, 2008; 11:11 a.m.

Justin, nice pictures.

Justin NGO , Jul 17, 2008; 11:13 a.m.

Color and sharpness: the Tamron at f2.8 ,hand-held,no editing, on my D80 : http://www.flickr.com/photos/huytuong/2640102046/in/set-72157605955363658/

Speed of micro-motor AF: These shots I took oncoming 60 mph trucks' side panels, on the highway, through a side tinted -window of my van, ( was at 60mph too, that means 120 mph moving objects).Were the AF Tamron fast enough?. You can download them in full size: http://picasaweb.google.com/huytuong/FastMovingObjects/photo#5222988502551691090

Hiro Matsu , Jul 17, 2008; 11:49 a.m.

I just made that decision and opted for the Sigma II. Not for any reason really, either would have suited my needs, it's just the Sigma presented itself for a reasonable price in like new condition.

I am very pleased with the Sigma. Optically, mechanically, and aesthetically.

Jose Rivera , Jul 17, 2008; 02:22 p.m.

In testing the two lenses the Tamron felt good on the D300 because it was slightly lighter than the Sigma but the colors where off. I loved the fact that the AF switch was very simple to use but had enough tension that it wouldn't be too easily changed.

I really wanted to see how others felt. I saw Justin's photos and thought that would be the quality out of the box. But like he said, it might have the copy of the lense.

Sigma is a heavy lense and I will try to attach a large file photo from the Bronx Zoo.

Jose Rivera , Jul 17, 2008; 02:25 p.m.

The Monarch butterfly shot was handheld in a slightly crowded butterfly garden.

    1   |   2     Next    Last

Back to top

Notify me of Responses