Tamron or Sigma 24-135?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Joel Dorfan - 15 Aug 2005 16:27 GMT

I have narrowed my lens choice down to the Tamron 24-135/3.5-5.6 as a leave
on the camera lens.
I was about to buy and then noticed the Sigma 24-135/2.8-4.5 which excited
me as on paper it appears to be faster and overcomes the comments that the
Tamron was a little slow.
Then I looked at the prices. The Sigma is significantly cheaper than the
Tamron ($350 vs $400) and the reviews are not as good as for the Tamron.
Everyone has said that with lenses, you get what you pay for. Has Sigma
sacrificed optical quality for speed?

If I buy the Tamron, in low light ,will I be sorry that I dont have the
Sigma or will the picture quality in all other situations make up for this?

TIA

Joel

Reply to this Message

Toa - 15 Aug 2005 19:10 GMT

> I was about to buy and then noticed the Sigma 24-135/2.8-4.5 which excited
> Joel

What about the Sigma 18-125? F3.5-5.6. It's wider than the 24-125 but a
tad slower

Can be had for under $300 from B&H

Toa

Reply to this Message

Brian - 15 Aug 2005 20:58 GMT

My roommate and I have been doing a lot of research and the Tamron
looks like a really good lens. It's actually 369 after rebate at
adorama.com, 319 after rebate at buydig.com.

Check fredmiranda.com and popphoto.com as well as these groups for more
reviews...and of course if you see anything really useful - post it
here :)

Thanks, Brian

Reply to this Message

G.T. - 16 Aug 2005 01:03 GMT

> My roommate and I have been doing a lot of research and the Tamron
> looks like a really good lens. It's actually 369 after rebate at
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> reviews...and of course if you see anything really useful - post it
> here :)

I like the optical quality of my Tamron 24-135 but the mechanical aspects
kind of suck. The zoom ring is the stiffest thing I've ever turned.

Greg

Reply to this Message

Gisle Hannemyr - 16 Aug 2005 08:19 GMT

> I like the optical quality of my Tamron 24-135 but the mechanical
> aspects kind of suck. The zoom ring is the stiffest thing I've ever
> turned.

I concur. Also: The aperture ring has a smaller diameter than the
rest of barrel, and is located flush with the body, making it awkward
to operate in manual mode. The focus ring is OK, AF is as good as it
gets without SWM, but the zoom very stiff.

But the optics are great!

Signature

- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply to this Message