Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 or Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 for sports???

If any of you have a preference or experience with either or these two lenses, I would greatly appreciate your input. I plan to get one of the two for indoor sports such as basketball, volleyball, cheerleading, etc. I currently have the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 for my 20D but I want one of these two lenses for my 10D. It will also be used for a general walk around lens. I can't afford the Canon L in this focal range.

Get an 85mm 1.8 instead. An aperture of 2.8 is pretty slow for indoor sports. The 85 is fast focusing, sharp, and produces some great background blur. It's very reasonably priced, too, considering the quality of the lens. I have the Tamron you mentioned and felt it was too slow and too soft for sports. It's a fantastic walk around lens, but just doesn't cut it in the gymnasium, in my opinion. Just my 2 cents.

liza, I have the 85mm f/1.8 and love it. But sometimes I need to reel it in. This is why I'm looking at one of these two lenses. But, your two cents is welcome anytime.

Get the sigma. Its focus is some what faster than the tamron and the build quality is on par with the 70-200 you already have. The tamron is mostly plastic and doesnt feel as strong.

For indoor sports shooting, especially in the poorly lit places, an f2.8 is not the best choice - but usable. On the 10D you'll be constantly shooting at 1600 or 3200 and doing some noise reduction.

I have the tamron 28-75 which I bought last year for the same things you're looking for - something to do sports with and a great walk around lens. You can do both with it, but it is stronger as a walk around lens.

I posted some shots on the link below in the sports photo section.

http://www.photography​-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=113517

I also have a canon 85mm f1.8 and a sigma 30mm f1.4 which I now exclusively use for indoor sports shooting... but I still use the tamron when now and then for sports when I find myself in a well lit indoor venue. I love my primes, but I still prefer a zoom for sports.

Watch out for the Tamron! I got one of the bad copies you hear so much about on these pages and it was a huge disappointment. I ended up with a Canon and am very happy with it.

Edited for spelling by Jon

Thanks to all. This is the type of info I need to help me make a decision. The 28-75mm or 24-70mm range would be perfect for me as a second lens indoors.

My Canon 85mm f/1.8 is great. I've been using my Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 for all of my indoor sports with a flash. My sigma copy shoots a little soft sometimes. This I will be upgrading to a non IS Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 soon. Hopefully for Christmas.

The best lens I own is the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8, but, it's a little to big to lug around a basketball court plus way too long on the short side.

You've got a lot of ground covered with good glass (viz., 85, 70-200, 120-300). It doesn't seem like "weight" is much a matter to you as you've got some hefty stuff already. If that's the case, the Sigma 24-70 is a strong performer. The Tamron is lighter but I in terms of AF speed, build quality, and focal range, I'd say the Sigma is right up your alley. Optically the EX and Di are pretty close, and any variation is going to be copy-dependant. But I've always said the Sigma 24-70EX is the closest thing to the 24-70L and I still think that.

I've been here several months and must have missed all those posts Storm in a teacup.

I can advocate for both the Tamron and Sigma having had both and could echo what fstopjojo says, but I won't.

Personally, I would stick to fast primes when lights reduce. Walkaround and general use then any ofd the mid range zoom will do you very nicely ... including the Canon L.

While I like the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, don't you all think it's focusing is a tad on the slow side for sports?

The OP mentions he/she wants a lens for both indoor sports and general walk around. He/she already has a bunch of great glass (85, 70-200, 120-300). My response is more so for the "walk around" and not so much for the indoor sports. I'd agree for indoor sports, the 85 is the best bet. Not many better options really as its AF and aperture are f-a-s-t.

I got you. I was just asking thinking perhaps my version was faulty.

For the record, I'm a he. My 85 has performed flawlessly in low light conditions. I just wanted to be able to back off a little more. I shoot 95% vertical using my grip shutter so I wanted to get the entire player in the frame. I shoot for 4 different sports publications and serve has a helper photographer for the local college. College venues, threre really isn't a lighting issue. However, high schools are much worse when it comes to proper lighting.

condyk wrote:
I've been here several months and must have missed all those posts Storm in a teacup.

I can advocate for both the Tamron and Sigma having had both and could echo what fstopjojo says, but I won't.

Personally, I would stick to fast primes when lights reduce. Walkaround and general use then any ofd the mid range zoom will do you very nicely ... including the Canon L.

Some of that bad press could have been on other pages but this is one of those (love it or hate it) lenses. Since I had a bad experience guess which one I am. There are a lot of pages here talking about this lens and poor quality if you search. There was even a poll on this and only 83% of respondents said they got good copies on the first try https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=49000

If you get one of the other 17% of these things your "storm in a tea cup" analogy dosent really apply, does it.

Well, that's definately true I guess in your case. Your mind is made up Sending a faulty anything back and getting a replacement is just what happens in life, whether it's a lens, kettle, CD, whatever. If that stuff really annoys you then I guess it annoys you.

I had a Sigma 80-400 OS that had a problem and I sent it back, doesn't mean I think all other 80-400 OS's are bad. I had some Canon zoom about 3 years back that just packed in within 4 months or so. We read every day here about problems with this and that: doesn't matter about brand or whether lens, camera body, grip, flash, IS motor, whatever. If you want to generalise then Ok. Personally I think the results of that survey are pro Tamron lens: perception is strange eh? Be great to see the results of a similar survey for the 24-70 L Doubt it would be too different.