If you had to pick one over the other, would you go with the Tamron or the Sigma?
acjeske wrote in post #5642424
I had the Tamron 28-300VC and liked it more than the Tamron 18-250, for the addition of the VC. Nice. However, then I picked up an 18-200 OS in a shop and shot a few frames. At home, it turned out that the Sigma smoked the Tamron for IQ, even with the reduced range (e.g. view Sig at 150% vs Tam at 100%). So I ordered a Sigma, hoping the copy I got was as good as the shop's (I'm in South Africa, but ordered from the US, saving about 45%). And my copy's just as sweet. I think the QC issues at Sigma may have been worked out after initial outcry. I wonder if folks buying newer ones are having issues like others initially...
And the wide end of the Sigma is worth a lot more than the additional 100mm at the long end. I suppose 200mm is faster than the 200mm on the Sigma, though.
I'd post images, but connectivity is expensive here!
Adam
jeskelife.org
I had the Tamron 28-300VC and liked it more than the Tamron 18-250, for the addition of the VC. Nice. However, then I picked up an 18-200 OS in a shop and shot a few frames. At home, it turned out that the Sigma smoked the Tamron for IQ, even with the reduced range (e.g. view Sig at 150% vs Tam at 100%). So I ordered a Sigma, hoping the copy I got was as good as the shop's (I'm in South Africa, but ordered from the US, saving about 45%). And my copy's just as sweet. I think the QC issues at Sigma may have been worked out after initial outcry. I wonder if folks buying newer ones are having issues like others initially...
And the wide end of the Sigma is worth a lot more than the additional 100mm at the long end. I suppose 200mm is faster than the 200mm on the Sigma, though.
I'd post images, but connectivity is expensive here!
Adam
jeskelife.org
