Hi guys, which of these lenses would you prefer? I'm just looking for a standard walk-around zoom lens with constant apeture when I need it. Would you go for the Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX DG or Tamron 17-50/2.8 SP XR Di II LD (Whew!)?

I've been flipping back and forth across review sites and they all have mix reviews so I am really confused. I recently bought a Sigma 24-70/2.8 and its really massive (I liked the extra "zoom"). It often feels like it's holding the K200. I prefer something that is more discreet and not ostentatious as I'm only into it as hobby and not a pro. I still have a week to decide whether to return or keep the sigma 24-70.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.:)

what other lenses do you have beside the 24-70 f2.8?

Is size and weight only the issue on the 24-70?

Tamron for me. I have read good reviews of this lens.

Cheers!

I have the DA 40mm f2.8, the kit lens, I also used to have the A-50mm f1.7 but gave it away as I thought I'm not coming back to Pentax anymore. The 50/1.7 was my everyday lens though, but I hate when people take my picture and doesn't know how to manually focus. The DA 40 is kinda redundant now that I have the 2.8/24-70 sigma.

@bongbajo

Thanks, I'm kinda leaning over the Tammy also.

I think I saw a thread here comparing the three, just now. Thanks for the response.

Both of them are APS-C designated lenses, so you do get back the range from 17/18 to 36. I have the exact same Sigma lens, the 24-70 2.8 EX, and I bought it for the weight. I just love the sturdiness of the lens, and how it interacts with the body with battery grip.

There are only two more lenses that I would want to buy before my LBA will be satisfied, and that is an Ultra Wide Angle, which I have my sights set on the DA 12-24 on, and a good 70-200 2.8. :)

I had my time with the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 and it's great.. F2.8 is not that super sharp but at 3.2 and above.. That's it, super sharp! Ahahahaha..
Check my multiply account and look for the Aliwan thread and you'll see how sharp it is.. :D

The only thing I really want about the Sigma is the range which works for me most of the times.. Well most of my photos were taken in that range.. :D

The Pentax DA 17-70mm F4 will be a great one but IQ is still not tested and price is way high.. :D

There are only two more lenses that I would want to buy before my LBA will be satisfied, and that is an Ultra Wide Angle, which I have my sights set on the DA 12-24 on, and a good 70-200 2.8. :)

alan, maybe for a few short months, then LBA strikes back. :Grin:

i had my hands on a da* 50-135 yesterday. i've always wanted this lens since i was able to try out doc mark's copy. but my need for a 70-200 is greater so no da* for me yet. i'm waiting for the tamron 70-200 and the reviews comparing it to the sigma 70-200.

alan, maybe for a few short months, then LBA strikes back. :Grin:

i had my hands on a da* 50-135 yesterday. i've always wanted this lens since i was able to try out doc mark's copy. but my need for a 70-200 is greater so no da* for me yet. i'm waiting for the tamron 70-200 and the reviews comparing it to the sigma 70-200.

We are definitely in the same boat then. I'm interested in the DA* 50-135, but a 70-200 would be a better buy for me. Believe it or not, I am actually *hoping* that Pentax/Samsung will eventually release a K-Mount Full frame camera in the future.

It's either the Tamron, or the Sigma HSM II. :D

@Joey: I have the 50-135, and yes it is a superb lens. I was comparing the difference between 135mm and 200mm (with my 18-250mm), and the difference in magnification isn't really that large. I still have my manual 70-200/4 if I really need the reach and speed (albeit, 1-stop slower! 18-250 for the reach only), but the 135 does the job well. If ever, I'd rather crop a little than to miss out on the superb IQ of the DA* :) Oh, and I'm planning to get the 16-50/2.8 from Leonard soon...(when I sell some of my unused guitar stuff...:D) edit: also, the difference between 70mm and 50mm on the other hand, is much more noticeable... it's true when they say a mm in the wide end is much more noticeable than 10mm in the long end... almost never leaves my K10D now, the 50-135, great walkaround...

good afternoon josel,when you said keep or return the sigma 24-70 is it for sale? have you decided na and is the lens open to others. how muc nga pala. i need a decent lens within that range for my k100super. tyHi guys, which of these lenses would you prefer? I'm just looking for a standard walk-around zoom lens with constant apeture when I need it. Would you go for the Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX DG or Tamron 17-50/2.8 SP XR Di II LD (Whew!)?

I've been flipping back and forth across review sites and they all have mix reviews so I am really confused. I recently bought a Sigma 24-70/2.8 and its really massive (I liked the extra "zoom"). It often feels like it's holding the K200. I prefer something that is more discreet and not ostentatious as I'm only into it as hobby and not a pro. I still have a week to decide whether to return or keep the sigma 24-70.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.:)

:)good afternoon josel,when you said keep or return the sigma 24-70 is it for sale? have you decided na and is the lens open to others. how muc nga pala. i need a decent lens within that range for my k100super. ty
@ melo garces

I think there's plenty to chose online, bro. dito ko binili sa US. you know naman here. when you don't want something, send it back for a full refund. so I'm sending the sigma 24-70/2.8 back. Out of LBA, napa-bili ako. I think the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 SP bla-bla-bla has equally nice reviews and lighter than Sigma although the Sigma is sturdy and looks really professional. In the end, I realized I have been using the DA 40mm most of the time kaya zooming is not really a factor for me as I learned to move forward and backward with my feet. The D-FA 50mm f2.8 Macro is selling at $296 at Circuit City (online). I got one as replacement for my A-50mm 1.7. It's pretty noisy though, even at few cubes away my co-workers could hear the lens focusing. The sales rep told me to try out the lens for 30 days and if it doesn't sink in on me, I could send it back.:)

@josel, SoCal meetup at the end of this month?

@josel, SoCal meetup at the end of this month?
You mean meetup for DPP users in SoCal?:) I'd love too, bro but I may not be able to, I'll be somewhere else from 7/22 through September.

I had my time with the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 and it's great.. F2.8 is not that super sharp but at 3.2 and above.. That's it, super sharp! Ahahahaha..
Check my multiply account and look for the Aliwan thread and you'll see how sharp it is.. :D

The only thing I really want about the Sigma is the range which works for me most of the times.. Well most of my photos were taken in that range.. :D

The Pentax DA 17-70mm F4 will be a great one but IQ is still not tested and price is way high.. :D

I'm eyeing the DA 17-70 F4 or Tamron 17-50 F2.8 as my next lens purchase.. which would be a long time from now :P Hope to see comparisons soon. For now, I'll just drool hehehe :P

im considering between these 2 lenses which to buy, i need your output with the performance of these 2 lenses. TIA

Walang nagreact dito... Up natin. I'm curious as well.

I chose the Tamron between the two. The Sigma has a closer minimal focusing distance but I did not like the orientaion of the focusing ring since Im a Nikon user. Its Canon oriented. Im Happy with the Tamron. Build quality goes to Sigma but the finish feels that it might fade earlier. The Tamron has a plasticky feel but im careful with my gear.

how about IQ?

how about IQ?
Tested the Sigma before. I find the Tamron to be sharper and has a more pleasing color cast compared to the Sigma which can be too yellowish or brownish but in fairness, the Sigma has a better bokeh. At f/2.8 they're about even but once you reach f/5.6 this is where the Tammy's superb sharpness kicks in. 17mm vs 18mm at the wide end makes a lot of difference too.:)

Tamron hands down

im considering between these 2 lenses which to buy, i need your output with the performance of these 2 lenses. TIA

i have the sigma and i'm very happy with it, in fact i use 99% of the time on my Nikon D90.

i don't have the tammy 17-50 but i used to have the tammy 28-75 2.8. Tammy optics are good but finishing and AF speed goes to sigma.

hth :Grin:

I'd go for Tamron. Lighter, sharper, cheaper.

Downsides: fungus prone, cheap plastics, slow AF (vs HSM).

They both have their pros and cons, but the Sigma lens has better built, closer focusing distance, faster AF, better bokeh and better service. JT Photoworld has great after market service, which I believe is important.

Although the Tamron's IQ is better. Plus the 1mm difference goes a long way for landscape photos.

@OT: might as well get the Canon/Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 for no looking back.

guys, advice on real world performance of the sigma 18-50 macro and the tamron 17-50 2.8 with Nikon no motor bodies?

i previously owned a tamron for my old canon camera, focusing is slow and noisy, is it the same with Nikon? I might go sigma because of this, help please :)

also, are both of the lenses above sharper than the 18-105?

thanks!

ive been using tamron 17-50 f2.8 non vc since 2008, yes its slow and noisy.... but very very sharp. dont know about sigma but they say that sigma has faster focusing speed even faster than Nikon lens.

ive been using tamron 17-50 f2.8 non vc since 2008, yes its slow and noisy.... but very very sharp. dont know about sigma but they say that sigma has faster focusing speed even faster than Nikon lens.

hi jerrick, thanks for your response :)

How's the focus accuracy of your tamron?

Had the same dilemma before... First got the sigma for it's macro, returned it the same day... Maybe I got a soft copy, I didnt find it sharp enough. Got the Tamron instead, still happy with it upto now. To my delight the Tammy also focuses very close @ 10in. compared to Sigma's macro 8in., 10in is close enough for my purpose, mostly for food snaps.

Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 Non-VC Version
Exposure: 0.033 sec (1/30) - Hand held
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 50 mm
ISO Speed: 3200
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Flash: No Flash
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1145/4598211101_be2cd852d3.jpg

The general consensus among web reviews is that the Tamron is optically better and that the Sigma's advantage is its closer focusing distance and mechanical construction, yet still the Tamron is more recommended.

A friend had the Sigma 18-50 before and he wasn't particularly happy with it. His copy suffered terrible zoom creep as well.

Hi. I'm looking for a walk around lens that i could use for real long while. Hehe
Which is better: Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 or Sigma 18-50 mm F2.8 EX DC Macro. THANKS

Personally, Tamron 17-50. Sharper, lighter, cheaper.

Personally, Tamron 17-50. Sharper, lighter, cheaper.

Sir, care for sample shots of Tamron @ 2.8, Planning to buy also..TIA:Grin:

Hi Fred,

Ive tried the tamron with BIM, medyo mabagal cya mag focus.. but might have tried a bad copy, better test a few before buying =)

Browse for Carlos888 @ TipidPC, he's selling Brandnew Tamron 17-50 2.8 Non-VC version with the New Built In Motor, less noise better performance. He's prices are always competitive if not the cheapest.

this will do the talking :) find out who wins.


http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/43949-sigma-18-50mm-f2-8-ex-macro-vs-tamron-17-50mm-f2-8-brick-wall-test.html


http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/44013-part-2-sigma-18-50mm-f2-8-ex-macro-vs-tamron-17-50mm-f2-8-brick-wall-test-crops.html