Sigma 17-50 f2.8 OS vs Tamron 17-50 non-vc f2.8

I'm buying one or the other in the next two weeks to pair with my 60D.

I'm not concerned about focusing speed. What I am concerned about is image performance primarily within the 17-24 range (sharpness and barrel distortion) and bokeh rendering. I love my Sigma primes because of their bokeh and sharpness, so the Sigma definitely appeals to me. Is this zoom worth the extra money over the Tamron if I'm not concerned about image stabilization and focusing speed? This will be used frequently with video work, by the way.

if OS and HSM are not important to you I think Tamron in an excellent choice.

check the lens sample archive and look at examples from both lenses.

Since AF speed and stabilization is not important to you, then there is no need to spend the extra for the Sigma. Those two features were the biggest reason why I dumped the Tamron to get the Sigma. For the money, the Sigma is a decent alternative to the Canon 17-55.

So it seems the image quality and bokeh are pretty equal.

One last question: build quality.

Is one better in this regard than the other? What about zoom smoothness (for sake of zooming while filming)?

For video, you'll want the OS if not using a tripod, take that into consideration.

The sigma is sharper, and has much better build, but whether thats worth the extra money to you is entirely your decision.

There's been a thread on Sigma/Tamron 17-50 vs Canon 17-55 and this guy claimed the Sigma 17-50 was by far the best: IQ, OS, build quality.
Personally I'd go with the sigma, but maybe that's just me. It is much more expensive of course.

My Tamron is very sharp. The build on the Sigma's are heftier, metal vs plastic on the Tamron, my Tamron does feel solid though, not like the plastic low end Canon's. Personally, if money was not an issue, I would get the Sigma, since you are getting (OS), which would be handy for video, my guess, I don't do video. Another option, is the sigma 17-70 (OS), it is suppose to be slightly less IQ, but you get a little extra reach.

Sirrith wrote in post #12438843
For video, you'll want the OS if not using a tripod, take that into consideration.

The sigma is sharper, and has much better build, but whether thats worth the extra money to you is entirely your decision.

Agree with OS for video, it does make a difference.

Not sure about the last statement - this may be just my perception, but both the sharpness and the built "feel" of my Sigma is pretty close to my Tamron non-VC. Actually, Tamron has a somewhat more solid hood, and waaaaay better lens cap - the one I got with Sigma was very flimsy, wouldn't attach well to the lens, and I eventually lost it and replaced with an eBay one which is much better and feels more like Tamron's.

Yet another advantage of Sigma is faster and quieter focusing.

Basically, it's an improved Tammy non-VC with no trade-offs (I forgive them the cap ) but at a higher price.

Amamba wrote in post #12441638
Agree with OS for video, it does make a difference.

Not sure about the last statement - this may be just my perception, but both the sharpness and the built "feel" of my Sigma is pretty close to my Tamron non-VC. Actually, Tamron has a somewhat more solid hood, and waaaaay better lens cap - the one I got with Sigma was very flimsy, wouldn't attach well to the lens, and I eventually lost it and replaced with an eBay one which is much better and feels more like Tamron's.

Yet another advantage of Sigma is faster and quieter focusing.

Basically, it's an improved Tammy non-VC with no trade-offs (I forgive them the cap ) but at a higher price.

which lens cap did you get? I have the sigma on order from Adorama, might as well pick up a lens cap now

DiMAn0684 wrote in post #12442005
which lens cap did you get? I have the sigma on order from Adorama, might as well pick up a lens cap now

"Mennon 77mm Center Pinch Lens Cap with leash for Nikon" from photogearetc.

I actually emailed them and asked what makes a 77mm lens cap a "for Nikon" cap. Just to be a smart ass.

It's a nice cap, almost as good as the Tamron one. I paid less than $5 with shipping from States.

Amamba wrote in post #12441638
Not sure about the last statement - this may be just my perception, but both the sharpness and the built "feel" of my Sigma is pretty close to my Tamron non-VC. Actually, Tamron has a somewhat more solid hood, and waaaaay better lens cap - the one I got with Sigma was very flimsy, wouldn't attach well to the lens, and I eventually lost it and replaced with an eBay one which is much better and feels more like Tamron's.

The sigma's I've handled have all felt nicer than canon and tamron variants, but I haven't tried a tamron 17-50 before so I'm just going by what I hear around the web
As for the lens cap, I've had pretty annoying experiences with the lens cap for the sigma 10-20, but as far as the other lenses go, they've always been fine.

Amamba, thank you for the info!

Not sure how a lens cap can be flimsy. Mine on my 17-50 is just fine. Like others have said, if you don't need OS and HSM, go for the Tamron. Love my Sigma though would never sell it. THe OS and HSM are brilliant.

About to pull the trigger. But one last question:

Focus ring smoothness.

I'm going to be manually focusing a lot in video. How smooth/usable is the Sigma's focus ring and the Tamron's? Does either leave a lot to be desired for manual focus work, specifically video related?