Comments on the Tamron 18-200?

[sam bailey]

I am shooting with a 20D. I have a bag full of various lens already, all Canon. I am not shooting as a professional, only a very experienced amateur. This looks like it could be a viable lens when I don't want to lug my bag with me all day long. I would be shooting with this one during the day mostly so a faster lens would not be needed. Any experiences with it? My main concern would be focusing quality not necessarily great lens quality. Thanks for any input or an alternative lens from Canon or others.

[Carpetshark]

I have the 28-200 Tamron- I like it. Seems pretty good all the way.

Carpetshark

[Rumrunner]

Sigma makes a much better 18-200mm for the same price. I have the lens, it does very well for the price, and it does super when stopped down to f8.

This site has tested both of them if youd like to compare them side by side.

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/index.php

[ccp900]

i wouldnt necessarily say sigmas 18-200 is better than tamrons. i have a tamron and im happy with it. Just dont expect it to do things the lens wasnt made to be doing. Like shooting in low light at 200mm and expecting sharp photos.

There are some sites that reviewed the sigma and tamron and concluded that tamron was a bit better than sigma due to the fact that the tamron is more accurate in its AF at low light versus sigma. I think kenrockwell is 1 such site there were others but i have forgotten them. I was also doing some research when i wanted to buy an all in 1 lens.

Tamron and Sigma would have bad copies and good copies. Just test whatever you wanna buy.

For me though, im happy with my tamron, its sharp and handy. But i shoot my 24-105L almost exclusively now.

[Xico]

I bought the Sigma DC and returned it. The focus was chasing half of the time.
Got the Tamron Di II XR, and no problems since.
I have to say that the IQ was a little bit better on the Sigma in my opinion.
At 18mn, the Tamron shows a lot of barrel distortion. (Easy to fix in Photoshop)
Photozone says "In the field the Tamron AF 18-200mm XR felt far more convincing than the Sigma AF 18-200mm DC thanks to a decent AF performance so if it has to be such an extreme zoom lens the Tamron is the better bet."

[sam bailey]

Thanks guys, I really appreciate the feedback. This forum is really great and serves us well. Sam

PS: I think I will try the Tamron since I have heard too many issues with the SIgma in regrads to reliable AF. I am sure it may not be an issue with every one, but I dont think the other differences outway reliable AF for an "all in one" cheap lens to carry when you don't want carry a suitcase full of lenses.

[sam bailey]

PS: Sorry for the mispellings. I am sitting here drinking beer and smoking a cigar (well several beers and cigars). I have heard there is going to be a Tamron version of this 18-200 with OS (optical stablilization) coming out. Any idea of when and what estimated price would be?

[mxwphoto]

Just a thought... what kind of lenses will the 18-200 be replacing? The IQ on these types of lenses can make you unsatisfied depending on what you are using now.

[Rumrunner]

Yeah Tamron may have the Sigma beat for focus in low light somewhat, but definately not sharpness. When I say low light, were talking dark, that's why we have AF assist ;). I originally bought the Tamron and returned it -- the kit lens was sharper wide open. A friend of mine has the Tamron, but even he will agree the sigma is much sharper. Most legitimate reviews concurr. Here is something I will throw out there though.. many people think the Tamron has a better focus because it is alot quieter than the Sigma. Quiet doesn't mean it actually focuses better though...

Yeah, it's a good lens to have in the bag regardless though I think. Stop it down to f8 and they will get almost as sharp as any other lens. They do lack color reproduction however...

[Tee Why]

I think it's an ok lens. Both sigma and tamron 18-200 seem to be similar in terms of optics and both get soft at 200mm. If I wanted a cheap one lens for travel, I'd consider something like Sigma 17-70 or Sigma 18-125 to get better optics/speed instead of more reach.

[vctr]

Wait !!!

Tamron will be releasing a 18-250 in 2007
http://www.tamron.com/lenses
/default-photo.asp (http://www.tamron.com/lenses/default-photo.asp)

I will be purchasing the 17-50 f2.8 next week. This will be my first Tamron and read lots of great reviews.

[mxwphoto]

Wait !!!

Tamron will be releasing a 18-250 in 2007
http://www.tamron.com/lenses
/default-photo.asp (http://www.tamron.com/lenses/default-photo.asp)

I will be purchasing the 17-50 f2.8 next week. This will be my first Tamron and read lots of great reviews.

Though the range is very attractive, IQ is likely more mediocre. Big range zooms are engineering nightmares. That's why there's primes. If you like the focal range, be on the look-out for its IQ reviews after it comes out before deciding to spend money on it.