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 Oct 2009 (Friday) 14:30
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Tamron 28-75 or Sigma 17-70?

 
kissel
Member
Avatar
157 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Ukraine
     
Oct 02, 2009 14:30 |  #1

I want to replace my EF 28-135 IS USM. So far I have a choice of two particular lenses, that fit my budget.
1). Sigma 17-70 (non-HSM) f/2.8-4.5. Mint condition, complete package with the hood and paperwork. No warranty. No issues with focusing, pretty sharp, just as described at photozone.de
2) Tamron 28-75/2.8. No hood, but otherwise mint. Sharp on open aperture. BUT: seller says on his 20D it provokes Err#99 after every 30 shots or so, otherwise it works ОК. His other lens (same kind) causes no error. He cannot check it with other bodies to see if it has the same problem.

The price for each lens is only 200$. Naturally, Tamron's better choice, when flawless it costs 300$+. I don't care for only 28mm on the wide end, for if my wedding photographer carrier's any successful, i will be looking for 10-20 anyway. What are the chances that this lens will work without any problem on my 30D? The seller lives in another city, actually across the country, but I will be able to give it a 15 minutes check in the shipping company office before I actually pay the money for it. Is it worth any hassle? Since I will also have to buy a 430EX, the budget cannot be expanded for 17-50 or the 100% working 28-75, though I would very much wish it could.

Thank you!


Nikon D3 and stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,604 posts
Likes: 40
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Oct 02, 2009 14:47 |  #2

A lens with issues is not worth owning, even at a discount. If you don't trust the lens, you won't use it. I would not consider the Tamron lens in this case.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
EOS Rp | iPhone 11 Pro Max

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kissel
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
157 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Ukraine
     
Oct 02, 2009 14:58 |  #3

Thanks for the response! I am more into buying Sigma as well, yet the price on Tammy is way too attractive.
From what i've discovered about the err99, it can be the problem with the a)lens, b)bodyor c) the particular pair of the body and the lens. Wonder if anyone have had any problem with this particular model of Tamron on 20D and 30D.


Nikon D3 and stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jblaschke
Goldmember
Avatar
1,445 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 27
Joined Apr 2008
Location: New Braunfels, Texas
     
Oct 02, 2009 15:03 as a reply to  @ kissel's post |  #4

The Wife's primary lens for wedding photography is the Tammy 28-75. Mighty fine lens. Very lightweight, very sharp. She also uses my EF-S 10-22 for the times she needs UWA shots, but for the most part the Tammy more that fits the bill, particularly considering the lighting limitations of many weddings. Even with the err99 it's probably the better deal.

Forgot to add that she shoots with a 50D. Never had a problem with the lens.


Canon 7D | Canon 50D IR modified | Canon EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS L | Canon FD 500mm 8.0 Reflex | Canon EF 85mm 1.8 | Canon EF 50mm 1.8 mk I | Canon EF-S 10-22mm | Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 | Meade 645 (762mm f/5)
Model Mayhem (external link) | DeviantArt (external link) | Lisa On Location: New Braunfels Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gasrocks
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
13,432 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Portage, Wisconsin USA
     
Oct 02, 2009 15:32 |  #5

17 and 28 are not quite the same thing.


GEAR LIST
_______________

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kissel
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
157 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Ukraine
     
Oct 02, 2009 15:36 |  #6

gasrocks wrote in post #8749068 (external link)
17 and 28 are not quite the same thing.

I know :) But I mentioned above that I plan to buy EF-S 10-20 (or maybe Tokina 12-24), so this is basically not an issue for me.


Nikon D3 and stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Menelaus
Goldmember
Avatar
1,276 posts
Likes: 201
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Dallas
     
Oct 02, 2009 15:37 |  #7

I've used the 28-75 for weddings...and can describe it as just "adequate". You will get some decent shots if you have REALLY solid light, but it does have its limitations (28mm being the wide end one of them). IMO if you are serious about doing wedding photoging, I'd try to invest in the 16-35...that's a lens that you absolutely can't go wrong with.

If I'm just comparing the Sigma and Tammy in the OP, I'd go with the Sigma. I'm not one to take chances with buggy equipment.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kissel
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
157 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Ukraine
     
Oct 04, 2009 14:05 |  #8

I decided Sigma 17-70 would be a better candidate. But there's another question: does it have any adventage in comparison with 28-135? I just wonder if it's gonna be an upgrade or a downgrade?


Nikon D3 and stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bearkeithley
Senior Member
Avatar
481 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Alameda, CA
     
Oct 04, 2009 17:44 |  #9

Buy 'em both.


flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnbachel
Member
204 posts
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Albany, NY area
     
Oct 04, 2009 19:16 |  #10

The 17-70 is a very sharp lens at a reasonable price. It will give you a wider field of view at 17mm than your old 28-135. It doesn't have image stabilization, though with a maximum focal length of 70mm, that is not a big problem.

I have owned both the 28-135 and the Sigma 17-70. Both can produce excellent images.
The real issue you need to decide is whether you need the wide angle that the Sigma offers, or the telephoto that the Canon has.

In my case, I wound up buying a Sigma 18-125 OS lens, since I wanted both the wide angle and telephoto capabilities. Note that the difference in field of view between 18 and 28 mm. is much more significant than the difference between 125 and 135mm.

In the end, if you are changing lenses for better image quality, I'm not sure that you'll find that either the 17-70 or the 28-75 is much better than the 28-135 that you now have. The 28-135 is quite sharp on an APS-C camera like your 30D.

The 28-75, like the Tamron 17-50 and the Sigma 18-50, has one significant advantage though - it is an f:2.8 lens at all focal lengths, a nice feature to have under many circumstances. I wouldn't buy the 28-75 that you are looking at though - I'd be concerned that the err99 is caused by the lens.


John

_______________

Equipment: 50D, Sigma 17-70 f:2.8-4 OS, Sigma 70-300 OS, Metz Mecablitz 48 AF-1 strobe.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,407 posts
Gallery: 588 photos
Likes: 2859
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Oct 04, 2009 20:28 |  #11

If you're doing wedding photography, Id go with the 17-70, it sounds like you'll have a flash, So speed isnt that important necessarily...

Also, the 28-75 has issues from the sounds of it, so id avoid it...

That said i once bought a Nikon 35-70 f/2.8 for $75 because the owner said "it has fungus"

When i got it, it wasnt fungus at all...just a little smudging ;)

That said, a 35-70 f/2.8 at the time was $700 new and $500 used, So keep in mind how much i was saving, I was also told by a local shop they would clean it out for $150 or so...So it wasnt a big deal ;)

In your case, i wouldnt risk it


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kissel
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
157 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Ukraine
     
Oct 27, 2009 16:53 |  #12

Well, as a conclusion to the story, I bought a used but mint condition Sigma 17-70 (non-HSM) for mere 200$. And - I am already impressed with it's macro abilities and nice colors. Seems like it's gonna be my carry-around lens. :) Thank you all for help!


Nikon D3 and stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnbachel
Member
204 posts
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Albany, NY area
     
Oct 28, 2009 19:09 |  #13

Enjoy!


John

_______________

Equipment: 50D, Sigma 17-70 f:2.8-4 OS, Sigma 70-300 OS, Metz Mecablitz 48 AF-1 strobe.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kissel
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
157 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Ukraine
     
Oct 30, 2009 16:06 |  #14

Oh, yes, I do - especially surprisingly good macro capability of this lens and build quality.
On the other hand, wide open it's far from perfect, especially in the corners. I wonder how much time i will keep it.
Just realized that my journey to the world of digital SLR had started.... only a year ago - with the 400d kit (XTi), and back then i thought it's more than i can dream of - including the cheap kit lens. Now i have already changed 3 different bodies, collected some cheap lenses and am trying to swap everything for 50D and L's. I don't have as many bags as my wife does, but i guess that's just a question of time, haha :)


Nikon D3 and stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnbachel
Member
204 posts
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Albany, NY area
     
Oct 30, 2009 18:05 |  #15

Don't feel bad - I have owned the original Digital Rebel, an XSi, a 40D and my current 50D (I was able to use rebates from Microsoft Bing to make it possible to trade up for almost nothing). For lenses, I've had the 18-55 non-IS kit lens (very cheap - the front elements rattled), the Tamron 28-200 (versatile, but awful), the 17-70 (I liked it, but found the maximum zoom range to be too short, and I had no desire to carry more more than one lens), A 28-135IS (a good lens, but not enough on the wide end), and my current 18-125 OS Sigma (I like it, but am not committed to it if something better comes along).


John

_______________

Equipment: 50D, Sigma 17-70 f:2.8-4 OS, Sigma 70-300 OS, Metz Mecablitz 48 AF-1 strobe.

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

4,491 views & 0 likes for this thread
Tamron 28-75 or Sigma 17-70?
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 clippingpathboss
333 guests, 183 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.