Tokina 28-70 vs. Sigma 24-70

[txhptroop]

When comparing the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro DF and the Tokina 28-70mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro SV, I was wandering who would come out ahead or is it a toss-up. I know the Sigma will go a little wider. They both seem to be well built. I have looked at sample photos of each and cannot tell the difference. Is there a difference in photo quality? They both come in at 715 grams. The Tokina is a little less expensive and has a more common 77mm filter size. Thanks in advance for your opinions.
Jim

[condyk]

When I was searching objectively for a more reasonably priced, good quality standard zoom it was a fight between the Sigma and Tamron 28-75. The Tokina didn't come into it as the user reviews at fredmiranda.com didn't convince tho' there were a limited number. Given respective pricing I think the Tamron or Sigma are still the best choices and will both have good resale value. Buying again, I would go for the Sigma based on the test fstopjojo posted, though I am perfectly happy with my Tamron.

[txhptroop]

Thanks Condyk. I would love to see a lens test with the Tamron vs Sigma vs Tokina. I know the Tamron is a very well liked lens but I'm not fond of the plastic. No offense to anyone, I know it's a good lens and that is what the goal is.

[condyk]

The Tamron looks fine on the camera, it's only when you hold it and look close that you appreciate it's plastic and quite light in weight. I'm happy with it as an all round lens, including build. The low weight is actually a bonus as a walkaround :cool:

[Bob_A]

Take a look at the ratings at www.photozone.de . The results for lenses that I have owned and tried out seem to be spot on this sites survey results. They give the Tamron a rank (optical verdict) of 3.21 (good) and the Sigma a rank of 2.56 (average). The Canon 24-70 2.8L has a rank of 4.22 (very good).

Sure their results can be off a bit, and my feeling is that these are all pretty decent lenses ... with the Sigma and Tamron being the best bang for the buck. You don't have to squint too much to see the difference between something like the Canon 28-90 (at the bottom of the list with a 0.69 score) and the Sigma (a good lens), but you probably would have to squint a bit to see the difference between the Sigma and the L. By the way, I had a 28-90 (ranked "very poor") on my Elan for a few months and it was truly horrible, deserving the last place ranking ... and my 28-105 II USM was much, much better, but also deserves being called "poor" with a rank of 1.78 since it is only sharp at f8 to f11. The rankings for the Canon lenses seem to also match what you would expect looking at their MTF charts.

[condyk]

Take a look at the ratings at www.photozone.de . The results for lenses that I have owned and tried out seem to be spot on this sites survey results. They give the Tamron a rank (optical verdict) of 3.21 (good) and the Sigma a rank of 2.56 (average). The Canon 24-70 2.8L has a rank of 4.22 (very good).

The currently Sigma is the 24-70mm F2.8 EX DG MACRO which is a brand new model. It's not on photozone yet. I don't know if it's better or worse than the older Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX Aspherical DG DF, but it seems to be a fine lens. There is also the Sigma 24-70mm F3.5-5.6 ASPHERICAL HF to add extra confusion :rolleyes:

[txhptroop]

And I just realized Nokina has a 28-70 f2.8 and a 28-80 f2.8. The 28-80 is about $270 more which kindof burst my bubble. Now I have to figure out which of these is better.

EDIT:
I've done a little research on the Tokina and I am a little disappointed. I believe the 28-80 is a newer lens that came out in '2000. It is rated on one sight at 3.5 out of 5. Many stated the lens was not sharp at f/2.8 and had to be stepped down. Many claimed it should be considered an f/4. There were also many who complained about strong flare when shooting near the sun and sunrise and sunset shots were out of the question. Others were very pleased with the lens. All were impressed with the build quality.

[Bob_A]

The currently Sigma is the 24-70mm F2.8 EX DG MACRO which is a brand new model. It's not on photozone yet. I don't know if it's better or worse than the older Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX Aspherical DG DF, but it seems to be a fine lens. There is also the Sigma 24-70mm F3.5-5.6 ASPHERICAL HF to add extra confusion :rolleyes:

Should have read the model number more clearly :) It won't be long before it is on the list I'm sure.

They are all fine lenses optically. Once you get past a certain optical quality it gets more and more difficult to tell apart, especially stopped down a bit.