A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Nikon > Third-party Lenses > Sigma or Tamron 70-300...

Featured Equipment Deals

Interview with Environmental Photographer: Peter Essick Read More

Interview with Environmental Photographer: Peter Essick

A conversation with National Geographic photographer, Peter Essick, author of Our Beautiful, Fragile World.

Latest Equipment Articles

Choosing a Mobile Photo Printer Read More

Choosing a Mobile Photo Printer

In today's mobile, digital world, we carry hundreds or even thousands of pictures around on our smartphones and tablets. Tom Persinger looks at 4 different mobile photo printer options for getting...

Latest Learning Articles

Advanced Printing with Lightroom (Video Tutorial) Read More

Advanced Printing with Lightroom (Video Tutorial)

Building upon last week's Basic Printing with Lightroom video tutorial, this advanced printing tutorial will teach you to print contact sheets, print multiple images at a time, use Lightroom's present...


Sigma or Tamron 70-300 mm...which should i get?

Richard Gonzales , Mar 14, 2009; 01:20 a.m.

70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro Autofocus lens for Nikon AF-D
or
Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD Macro Autofocus Lens for Nikon AF?

I have a D60 so the built in motor was important. Anybody have any experience with either one??
or should i save the $$ and get the nikon brand (which has VR)

Im not a professional, I just want a little more reach for sports photography and maybe a bit of wildlife

Responses

Ray House , Mar 14, 2009; 03:08 a.m.

I had a Tamron 70-300 without a built in motor and it was a good lens for the price. I would however suggest buying the Nikon with VR. Do the Tamron and Sigma have built in motors?

Lil Judd , Mar 14, 2009; 04:18 a.m.

I'd get the Nikon 70-300VR - end of story.

anthony rowell , Mar 14, 2009; 04:21 a.m.

I am a canon man and all my lenes are canon you are always better with same make len's as the camera but if you look around you can get good second hand lens -ebay for one put the lens in the search engine and see what you can find !cheers.

Raden Munim , Mar 14, 2009; 07:09 a.m.

Nikon 70-300 comes in two versions. The G type is cheap, second only to 50mm f/1.8 price-wise. I don't have the figures but here's how I would rate the lenses:

  1. Nikon 70-300 IF-ED VR
  2. Sigma
  3. Tamron
  4. Nikon 70-300 G
As is usual with zooms, image quality for all 4 drops near the top end, so at 250-300 the images are softer. BUT, better than even the Nikon VR is the Sigma 100-300 f/4. It's constant aperture and is said to be as sharp as the Canon 300mm prime. No VR, though. Works well with teleconverters. That's what I'm going to get ... used ... later.

Kenneth Ray , Mar 14, 2009; 04:12 p.m.

I have the Tamron 70-300 Macro with built in motor. It is the latest model, f4-5.6. I have it on a D1x and find it to be very fast focusing and quality is excellant at all lengths. I would have no doubt that the Nikkors would be superior in all aspects save one. Price. In this area the Nikkors can't even come close. As far as quality goes, on things I have shot compared to my 80-200 f2.8 Nikkor at comparable focal lengths and handheld I have a hard time distinguishing which is which and the 80-200 is rated to be one of the best lenses Nikon has ever produced. Of course I only shoot JPEG images and do no post processing as I am not very gifted digitally and the PS Elements software I have is overwhelming to me. I have been in photography for well over 50 years and mostly used Leicas and Hassleblads and Bronicas in the film world. My last film camera which I still have is an F3 with MD-4 grip. I am new to digital and it is quite a chore for an old man to totally relearn the field as almost nothing makes real sense in digital to me. I find the Tamron lenses to be reasonably well built and the image quality certainly exceeds my capabilities at this time. I also have a Sigma 18-50 f2.8 macro that I believe to be the equal of anything Nikon has in this range. It, however, was not as good a bargain price wise as the Tamron 70-300. My budget is frugal which is the reason for the D1x and non-Nikkor lenses. I do feel these lenses to be both better quality and better buys than the 'kit' lenses. Given an unlimited budget I would of course choose the Nikkors.

Ray House , Mar 15, 2009; 01:35 a.m.

Just noticed a Nikor 70-300 VR in the classifieds for $300.

Richard Gonzales , Mar 18, 2009; 11:53 p.m.

Yes ray the sigma and tamron have built in AF motors (at least these models)
at B&H the sigma is $124 for last years model and the new model is $190 (APO is the only difference and I dont know what that is) the tamron is $150 the nikkor is $525 new and $425 used (on B&H)
btw im just a teenager just starting to get into photography in case that matters

Richard Gonzales , Mar 18, 2009; 11:54 p.m.

Yes ray the sigma and tamron have built in AF motors (at least these models)
at B&H the sigma is $124 for last years model and the new model is $190 (APO is the only difference and I dont know what that is) the tamron is $150 the nikkor is $525 new and $425 used (on B&H)
btw im just a teenager just starting to get into photography in case that matters

Back to top

Notify me of Responses