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 23 Sep 2008 (Tuesday) 23:40
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 Macro. The debate ends here!

 
Deadeye008
Member
136 posts
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Utah
     
Sep 25, 2008 10:02 |  #31

I have the Tamron and really like it. Only problem I've had with it has been focus hunting in different lighting situations, but it doesn't happen very often. I have been tempted to get, or at least try out, the Sigma though since it can focus closer than the Tamron.


Hamblin Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
david888lee
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
804 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Irvine, California
     
Sep 25, 2008 18:12 |  #32

WhoisDAN wrote in post #6377196 (external link)
Tamron is the way to go.

have you owned both?


Canon 50d | Canon Xti | Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS | Sigma 30 f/1.4

[-=Feedback=-] [flickr] external link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
twofruitz
Senior Member
Avatar
840 posts
Joined Oct 2007
Location: AUSTRALIA
     
Sep 25, 2008 18:33 |  #33

Posted this in another thread, but certainly relevant here.

Tamron 17-50 f2.8 at f6.3 on 40d. 100% crop.

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lonelyjew
Goldmember
Avatar
1,411 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Mar 2008
     
Sep 25, 2008 19:02 |  #34

My Sigma 18-50 Macro at 28mm on my 350D. These are straight out of the camera, only cropped to 100% edit* hmm, looks like it might not be exactly 100%, maybe 90%, I'm too lazy to redo it, you guys probably get the idea.. Gotta love the piss poor incandescent white balance on the 350D.

@ 2.8

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i175.photobucke​t.com …/tests/wootlove​mylens.jpg (external link)


@ 5.6
PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i175.photobucke​t.com …tests/wootlovem​ylens2.jpg (external link)

Canon 40D
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8, Canon EF-S 55-250mm IS, ∑ 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro, ∑ 105mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro
580ex II
An off brand tank of a tripod w/ Manfrotto 486RC2 Head

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PaCiFiSt
Senior Member
662 posts
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Malvern PA, USA
     
Sep 25, 2008 19:14 |  #35

I absolutely LOVE my 17-50. It produces superb shots. Even wide open it is sharp as a tack. Some of my favorite photos I've ever taken are with this lens.


Mike Dokas - 7D & 5D Mark II
Tamron 28-75 F/2.8 XR Di | 17-50 F/2.8 XR Di II
Canon EF 17-40 F/4L | EF 50 F/1.4 | EF 85 F/1.8 | EF 70-200 F/2.8L & 430EX
www.mikedokas.com (external link) | flickr (external link) | twitter (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
m3incorp
Senior Member
Avatar
989 posts
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Colorado, USA
     
Sep 26, 2008 16:26 |  #36

So the debate goes on. I'm in the boat that you can't go wrong with either as long as it is a "really" good example of the lens.


7D, 10D, Canon EFS 18-55mm modded
Canon EF 50mm, Canon 85mm 1.8, Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 XR DiII VC
Canon EF 70-300mm, 70-200 F4 L
, Canon 430ex ii Speedlite.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
efoo
Member
208 posts
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Oct 22, 2008 18:45 |  #37

Still no end to this debate. Looks like both lenses are sharp compared to other lenses on the market.

I'm also deciding between them for my next lens. Currently own a 400D/XTi with Sigma 18-200mm OS lens and Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens. Looking for a sharp standard zoom lens. I'm wondering how much better is Sigma's macro capability compared to the Tamron? Thinking of taking pictures of moles and skin lesions on patients in a doctor clinic, or do I really need a true and better macro lens than the Sigma? Mind you in Australia here, the Tamron sells for A$539 while the Sigma sells for $709. I know other places sell both for similar price or even cheaper for the Sigma. Cheers.


Canon XTi/400D | Canon 50mm f/1.8 MkII | Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 OS | Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 | Canon 430EX | Canon PowerShot S2 (broken) | Canon PowerShot A70

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
barq
Member
54 posts
Joined May 2008
     
Oct 23, 2008 16:08 |  #38

what about the different filter diameter sizes? Sigma has 72 mm and tamron 67 mm. Is it better to have larger filter diameter? Pro vise?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Oct 23, 2008 17:38 |  #39

Depends on your current lenses and filters.... you would want to have a lens with equal or greater filter diameter than your current lenses if you don't want to buy additonal filters. I am not talking about UV or clear filters, which I don't use.

Larger filters cost more money than smaller ones. Larger filters can be fitted to smaller diameter lens filter mounts using step up adapters which are only a few dollars.

People should post 100% crops, wide open at different apertures under different lighting conditions. Just about any lens will produce very good to excellent results stopped down. I think that it is a given. I'm interested in f2.8, otherwise why bother buying and paying for an f2.8 lens.


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
neil_g
Senior Member
Avatar
708 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2005
Location: South, UK
     
Oct 23, 2008 17:47 |  #40

the image i posted on page 2 was f3.5 @ iso 200.

f2.8 performance is nice, the bokeh is lovely. dont have any 100% crops to hand tho.


Burp.

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

4,932 views & 0 likes for this thread
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 Macro. The debate ends here!
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 le bleu
676 guests, 337 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.