Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 02 Aug 2013 (Friday) 21:11
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Sneak Peak: Sigma 70-200 OS versus Tamron 70-200 VC (Samples...wow)

 
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Aug 02, 2013 22:51 |  #16
bannedPermanent ban

Talley wrote in post #16176984 (external link)
I never said it wasn't great. The lens has been great for me thus far. The sigma at 2.8 produces very good results. It's just stopping it down to 3.2 produces much better results. I compared my sigma to my old canon F4 IS lens because it was the same exact price and the sigma has given me better opportunities as a lens with it's 2.8 capability.

Haha Talley gotta say I'm quite surprised you went with the Tamron duo. Thought you've learnt after 7D->6D and the Sigma 35 :p


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Talley
THREAD ­ STARTER
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,086 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2773
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Aug 02, 2013 22:54 |  #17

kin2son wrote in post #16176993 (external link)
Haha Talley gotta say I'm quite surprised you went with the Tamron duo. Thought you've learnt after 7D->6D and the Sigma 35 :p

Haha, ya the 6D/35 is a match made in heaven. The real test is if I will even use the 24-70 as I find myself to enjoy primes more. I can always offload the tamrons later and upgrade to canons as I am able to invest a bit more. These will be fun to use for the time being.


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
genjurok
Senior Member
537 posts
Joined Jan 2010
     
Aug 02, 2013 23:11 |  #18

Nothing surprising really.

I had the previous generation tamron 70-200 f/2.8 and the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II for a while. In the frame center of 200mm the tamron at f/3.2 or f/3.5 has comparable PQ to the IS II at f/2.8. While the Sigma 70-200 EX DG HSM (non-OS) needs to stop down to f/5.0 to have similar sharpness. At f/2.8, 200mm, the Sigma was just plain horrible. I know the 70-200 OS has improved but I'd expect the new Tamron would still beat the Sigma. Actually I will bet that the previous generation Tamron 70-200 is also sharper than the 70-200 OS. That thing is VERY close to the PQ of 70-200 IS II, at least in the frame center.

The 70-200 IS II at 200mm wide open even with a 1.4X tele converter still easily beats the 70-200 OS f/2.8 at 200mm. That tells you how much the Sigma is behind wide open at 200mm.


6D
Canon 17-40mm f/4L | Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 | Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II
Canon 50mm f/1.8 | Sigma 50mm f/1.4 | Canon 100mm f/2
580 EX | 430 EX | Pixel King Pro wireless radio trigger and receiver (x2)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
genjurok
Senior Member
537 posts
Joined Jan 2010
     
Aug 02, 2013 23:15 |  #19

Talley wrote in post #16176984 (external link)
I never said it wasn't great. The lens has been great for me thus far. The sigma at 2.8 produces very good results. It's just stopping it down to 3.2 produces much better results. I compared my sigma to my old canon F4 IS lens because it was the same exact price and the sigma has given me better opportunities as a lens with it's 2.8 capability.

Here is one of my early samples of my sigma at 2.8 on a 60D, it's plenty sharp
QUOTED IMAGE

Not saying it's a bad picture, but at that size it doesn't really prove much.


6D
Canon 17-40mm f/4L | Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 | Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II
Canon 50mm f/1.8 | Sigma 50mm f/1.4 | Canon 100mm f/2
580 EX | 430 EX | Pixel King Pro wireless radio trigger and receiver (x2)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
19,435 posts
Likes: 1614
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Aug 02, 2013 23:42 |  #20

Looking forward to report about AF performance.


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tommy1957
Goldmember
1,288 posts
Joined Apr 2013
     
Aug 03, 2013 01:48 |  #21

Subscribing.

I have the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 OS HSM. I agree with your initial assessment of it at f/2.8 & 200mm. It is a tad soft at those settings. It sharpens up a lot at f/3.2. At f/3.5 it is excellent. It is also very good at f/2.8 when pulled back to 180mm or less. It will be interesting to see the comparisons at other FL and apertures. I am not surprised at the Tamron, either. Several reviewers rate it sharper than the Sigma at 200. The focus speed comparisons will be interesting, also.

I would love to have the Canon II. Maybe when one of my cats lays a golden... er... egg. Until then, I think my used Sigma for $750 was a steal. I hope you can get an EF II into your test regimen.

Are you doing this on your 60D? My crop is a 60D, that makes this all the more interesting to me. I must say, I think 70-200 is made for full-frame, though. It is a more 'practical' lens on my 5D.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Aug 03, 2013 01:53 |  #22

kin2son wrote in post #16176895 (external link)
This pretty much proves that Sigma isn't that great as many have claimed, and how far ahead the 70-200II really is against these two...

No it doesn't. The Sigma is still very sharp, and costs just over half the price of the Mk II. That is why people are saying it is so good. If it was the same price as the MK II, people would not be saying this.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,423 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 344
Joined Sep 2011
     
Aug 03, 2013 02:26 |  #23

Sirrith wrote in post #16177232 (external link)
No it doesn't. The Sigma is still very sharp, and costs just over half the price of the Mk II. That is why people are saying it is so good. If it was the same price as the MK II, people would not be saying this.

Still the Tamron being slightly more expensive appears to be giving the same or more bang for the buck. This will be a more decisive statement after hearing about the AF accuracy. In TDP review, BrianC claims it gets 'out of wack' during servo bursts on a 1dx from time to time and that concerns me.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tommy1957
Goldmember
1,288 posts
Joined Apr 2013
     
Aug 03, 2013 02:26 |  #24

genjurok wrote in post #16177009 (external link)
... I know the {Sigma} 70-200 OS has improved but I'd expect the new Tamron would still beat the Sigma. Actually I will bet that the previous generation Tamron 70-200 is also sharper than the 70-200 OS. ...

Quote edited for brevity.

I own the Sigma and I agree with this. When I got my siggy zoom, the current (at that time) Tamron was reported to be of better IQ. Its problem was focus speed. As I bought the lens primarily for sports, I went with the Sigma. The new Tamron 70-200 VC is reported to have significantly improved AF abilities.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Aug 03, 2013 02:45 |  #25

FEChariot wrote in post #16177256 (external link)
Still the Tamron being slightly more expensive appears to be giving the same or more bang for the buck.

True. But this does not alter the existing performance/ability of the Sigma. All it does is provide another choice which may or may not be better bang for the buck. Much like the Sigma 35 did not make the 35L suddenly less great of a lens, just provided another choice with better optics for a lower price.

I think some people on this forum have a problem with making this distinction (not you). If a new, better piece of gear gets released, they immediately think the older item is no longer good.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
1Tanker
Goldmember
Avatar
4,470 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Swaying to the Symphony of Destruction
     
Aug 03, 2013 02:53 |  #26

Sirrith wrote in post #16177268 (external link)
True. But this does not alter the existing performance/ability of the Sigma. All it does is provide another choice which may or may not be better bang for the buck. Much like the Sigma 35 did not make the 35L suddenly less great of a lens, just provided another choice with better optics for a lower price.

I think some people on this forum have a problem with making this distinction (not you). If a new, better piece of gear gets released, they immediately think the older item is no longer good.

So it isn't just coincidence, that a great majority of users on this forum, jumped from the EF70-200 2.8 IS (v.1) to the 70-200 II? :p


Kel
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SamFrench
Senior Member
Avatar
870 posts
Likes: 60
Joined Jul 2011
Location: High in the Mountains
     
Aug 03, 2013 03:00 |  #27

1Tanker wrote in post #16177275 (external link)
So it isn't just coincidence, that a great majority of users on this forum, jumped from the EF70-200 2.8 IS (v.1) to the 70-200 II? :p

I smell a conspiracy! lol




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
THREAD ­ STARTER
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,086 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2773
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Aug 03, 2013 08:07 |  #28

FEChariot wrote in post #16177256 (external link)
Still the Tamron being slightly more expensive appears to be giving the same or more bang for the buck. This will be a more decisive statement after hearing about the AF accuracy. In TDP review, BrianC claims it gets 'out of wack' during servo bursts on a 1dx from time to time and that concerns me.

I will be sure to fully test the servo capabilities of both lenses. Seems like this would be the defining answer. To say the least I can say I perfer the OS vs the VC "When it comes to the stabilization".


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tommy1957
Goldmember
1,288 posts
Joined Apr 2013
     
Aug 03, 2013 08:23 |  #29

Talley wrote in post #16177550 (external link)
I will be sure to fully test the servo capabilities of both lenses. Seems like this would be the defining answer. To say the least I can say I perfer the OS vs the VC.

I am curious about that last statement. Are you referring to the image stabilization aspect of the Sigma vs Tamron, or the IQ, or just in general? What is it that you prefer?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
THREAD ­ STARTER
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,086 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2773
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Aug 03, 2013 08:28 |  #30

Tommy1957 wrote in post #16177574 (external link)
I am curious about that last statement. Are you referring to the image stabilization aspect of the Sigma vs Tamron, or the IQ, or just in general? What is it that you prefer?

Sorry I will reedit that statement. The stabilization. Again I need to fully test the Tamron. Will be taking it with me to the Houston Zoo tomorrow put it through some paces there.


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

16,144 views & 0 likes for this thread
Sneak Peak: Sigma 70-200 OS versus Tamron 70-200 VC (Samples...wow)
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is JenWorleyPhoto
1937 guests, 322 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.