Tamron 17-50 or Sigma 18-50 Macro?

Dave DB

Hi,

I've not posted here for a long time, but having received my D80 from Santa, I'll certainly be joining in from now on!

I'd appreciate your comments on the following choice:

Tamron SP AF 17-50 f2.8 XR DI II LD (phew!)
or
Sigma 18-50 f2.8 EX DC Macro

I can get them both for around £275 in the UK; and am looking for a good "walk-around" replacement for the 18-135 that came with the D80.

Thanks in anticipation,
Dave DB

Manfr3d

The Tamron is a great performer:

Read a good review here:
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tamron_1750_28_nikon/index.htm

I dont know how (if at all) better the Sigma is though.

DoctorIt

This is a tough one, very close, I think. I can't speak about comparison to the Tamron, but I have the Sigma on my D70 and it is an excellent lens. It's feel and build quality is better than some of my Nikkor's. Optically, it's also very good. A touch on the softer side until you hit smaller apertures (>4), but since it's f/2.8 wide open, it focuses fast and gives you great walkaround range.

I would definitely buy it again, and have owned several other EX class Sigma lenses that were some of my favorites.

But again, I haven't heard much bad about the Tamron either. I would really think you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between these two lenses. Maybe it just comes down to which one is easier to get for you.

Tee Why

The Tamron is a great lens, teh Sigma 18-50 macro is new and I 've not seen any reviews of this new macro version though.

DoctorIt

Tee Why wrote:

The Tamron is a great lens, teh Sigma 18-50 macro is new and I 've not seen any reviews of this new macro version though.

The "new" version is just a minor minor update to a lens that's been around for a couple years. It simply adds just a tad more range in close focus - it's not a true "macro" (just like any zoom that claims it has "macro" capability). I have the older non-macro version, and I've seen the new one - you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference, therefore, I can attest that the quality of the new lens is as good as the one that's well-established. I don't even think the internal optics or coatings are different.

rosselliot

I have the tamron 17-50 - I love this lens. you can go look at my site, the most recent portrait sessions under "professional" are all taken with this lens. I love it. it's exceptionally crisp. if you'd like, I can post some that I took of my sister on this post, because those pictures you can truly see the crispness of the lens.
I'm actually considering selling mine though, because I'm interested in getting the canon 17-55 IS because I'm going to france and will need the IS for the intertior of cathedrals or museums, etc. but the tamron actually does quite well in low light - f/2.8 is great

- RE

Dave DB

Thanks for all your input.

I went for the Sigma in the end - hard choice, probably very little between them anyway. What swung it? Slightly better macro capability and some reviews I'd read that shows the Tamron susceptible to a pronounced curvature in depth of field . In any event, I can exchange it for the Tamron if I'm not happy (although it'll cost me 10% of the purchase price).

I'll let you know my impressions when it arrives.

Cheers,

Dave DB