Tamron, Tokina & Sigma...Oh My!

AimeeJ

Just wondering what everyone's opinions are n these brands. Was kicking around the idea of starting with a non-nikon lense since I'm just starting out.

kelsow

I bought a Tokina 12-24 and am very happy with it.
Do some research on the lens you want here,
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/index.php

They haven't tested every lens but it may help narrow down your choices.

ian408

Do your research and you'll be fine.

I just added a Sigma to the pool. 8mm if you're interested.

Manfr3d

Tokina was founded by a bunch of
engineers from Nikon who wanted
to do their own thing. But nowadays
all 3rd party brands have some
great lenses to offer. Just do some
lens research before buying. Brand
should not be the decicive factor imo.

Tee Why

Most new lenses made by the third parites are pretty good. As with all lens makers, some of their lenses are gems and some are stinkers. Sigma has the most offerings, followed distantly by Tamron and Tokina.

Sigma denotes it's top notch pro grade lenses and lenses made for dslr with an "EX/DC", Tamron with a SP/Di I or II, and Tokina with ATX-ProD/Dx.
DC/Di II/Dx denotes a smaller rear element made for cropped sensors.

Some of the great lenses with great optics and price in my view are the following:

Ultrawides: Sigma 10-20 and Tokina 12-24
Normal zooms for cropped: Tamron 17-50, Tokina 16-50, Sigma 18-50 f2.8
macro, and Sigma 17-70.

Normal zoom for full frame: Tamron 28-75, Sigma 24-70

Fast primes: Sigma 30mm f1.4

Macros: Sigma 50mm, Sigma 70mm, Sigma 150mm, Sigma 105mm, Tamron 90mm, Tokina 100mm

Telephotos: Sigma 70-200mm, Sigma 120-300

Supertelephotos: Sigma 50-500, Sigma 300-800

pathfinder

You missed the Tamron 180 Di f3.5 macro - great on crop or full sensor body.

I also concur with your choices of the 28-75 Tamron, the 17-50 Tamron, and the Sigma 120-300f2.8 and the Sigma 300-800

Manfr3d

And also the Sigma 100-300/4.0 EX DG HSM.
(pssst, It's a real bargin on the used market too)

Umax

Have a Sigma 10-20 and a Tokina 100 macro, there both great.

cmason

Well since I am an Canon user, I can only respond in comparison to Canon lenses. When I was looking for new lenses, of course I assumed the Canon lens would be a better choice. However, I gave 3rd parties a try, and most compare very well, if not better than Canon choices. I own Sigma and Tamron both, and the 'superior' lines of each. These lenses are far better (IMHO) to Canon's consumer and mid-grade lenses. They have better build and performance.

Compared to Canon's top of the line lenses, L's and the highest rated EF-S lenses, well these lenses do not exceed those Canon lenses. On the other hand, they do not come close to the cost of those lenses either.

I have no hesitation in considering either Sigma or Tamron offering (don't own Tokina so can not make a recommendation). Like all lens manufacturer's, some lenses are better than others, so read reviews, try them out and enjoy.

claudermilk

Any of those three manufacturers would be a good choice. There's others out there (Phoenix, Opteka, etc.) which are not worth bothering with. If you're into some oddball stuff, there's Hartblei and Peleng with some interesting stuff--but that's really for after you have a good base kit.

The main thing with the 3rd party lenses is to check out the reviews & rent if possible. They each have some excellent models rivaling if not surpassing the competing OEM lens, and a number of real dogs. Some examples of the good stuff I'm aware of is Tokina's 12-24 (IMHO just as good as Canon's 10-22), Sigma's 100-300 and 120-300 reported to be every bit as good as Canon L glass, Tamron's 17-50 also reported to be as good as Canon offerings in the same range. So far I really only have experience with the Tokina.

Another excellent review site I use often is photozone.de--lots of tests under the same method on the same body so you can compare to some extent.

kts

kelsow wrote:

I bought a Tokina 12-24 and am very happy with it.

Seconding this. I LOVE my Tokina 12-24mm.

I'm leading towards getting their 11-16mm f/2.8 when it comes out and probably eventually the 16-50mm f/2.8 too. I'd love the Nikon 17-55 but with the Tokina at half the cost it's hard to say no to.

My friend has the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and loves it. Haven't gotten a chance to see it yet but the shots he got at an Anime convention with it looks pretty good.

Pindy

I have a 10-year-old Tokina 20-35 f/3.5—4.5 which has always performed well on a FF film body. It took a spill when I tripped and landed lens-first on a big rock at Pompeii and aside from a dented UV filter, the lens is built strong. Tokinas tend to be metal and dont take any guff.

I just bought my missus the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 which is lovely. The AF is noisy but pretty fast. A friend has the Sigma 30mm, which is one of the rare 3-rd party lenses with ultrasonic AF and it takes great pics.

Photoskipper

Not so much difference
I own Sigma 18-200 and Tamron 11- 18 mm for my crop sensor 300D (Rebel). It works fine and have some great photo occasionally. (due to my in-experience)

When I moved to 5D, I use only the original prime lens as I am taking it more seriously. I am still keeping those lens and old body as back up and second camera for big events.

But I feel most of the major lens manufactures do produce good lens. If there is no major complaint from those reviews, it may be acceptable.

Like cars, most of them can carry the family from point A to Point B, and 0 -60 miles/hr within 12 seconds. Unless you have specific needs, you may go for something special.

Scott_Quier

IMO (not so H ), the third party lenses are a very good choice, especially when $$$ are hard to come by. For the lower price, there are compromises made. Specific experience:

• Sigma 80-400 - slower AF, good OS (optical stabilization). While I didn't notice any problems with the lens, the person I sold it to found issues with burst photography with the OS engaged. I didn't notice that. A bit softer than the Canon 100-400 all across the focal length range.
• Sigma 50-500. Had it. Sold it. Wish now that I had not done so as it was/is a very, very good lens. Still, comparing it to the Canon 100-400, a bit softer at similar focal lengths. Tested using MLU, shutter release cable, on a tripod, etc. Softer yes, but very, very serviceable.
• Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 - very nice lens and, as I've said before, not a lens that I'm going to be selling even if I should acquire the Canon 24-70 f/2.8L. It has features that I find useful, it's very light, and the optics are very good.

I don't currently have a long zoom in my kit (longest FL is my 70-200) but when/if I buy a long lens again, it will probably be a Canon L (either the 100-400, or the 400 f/5.6L).

Manfr3d

Scott_Quier wrote:

II don't currently have a long zoom in my kit (longest FL is my 70-200) but when/if I buy a long lens again, it will probably be a Canon L (either the 100-400, or the 400 f/5.6L).

Way to go, I owned the Tamron 70-300/4-5.6 .. what a bargain for the
quality delivered, very light weight and well build. I sold it because
I bought the 70-200/2.8. I miss that lens from time to time. Also
the next thing will be a 400/5.6 because the 70-200 takes the 1.4x
TC very well and fills the "gap" to 400mm.

rpcrowe

Tamron, Tokina, and Sigma
All three of these companies produce some great lenses and some stinkers also. But, what the heck! Canon also has produced its share of odorous lenses.

I have four non-Canon lenses and I will rank them in the order I like them:

90mm f/2.8 Tamron SP Macro
This is a jewel among jewels. Although it is the model offered previous to the present SP DI Macro lens, the image quality is breath-taking. I rank the quality of the imagery from this lens right up with the best I have; which includes the 70-200mm f/4L IS and 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lenses. I got this lens on eBay for less than $125 including shipping. Now, that was a bargain!

12-24mm f/4 Tokina AF
Another stellar lens. I love everything about this lens! It has a constant f/4 aperture, provides excellent image quality and it is built like a tank. The price new is about $500 and this includes a free great lens hood.

400mm f/5.6 Tokina ATX
I bought this lens on a lark, bidding $100 for it on eBay and being surprised when I won it. It produces some very nice imagery, is light in weight, focuses relatively close (a lot closer than the 400mm f/5.6L) and is built like a tank. The AF is no where near as fast as the 400mm f/5.6L with its remarkable USM and this lens really needs to be stopped down a stop or two to achieve the best quality imagery (you can shoot the 400mm f/5.6L wide open with no loss in image quality). However, for a hundred bucks, this lens can produce some very sharp and contrasty images and 400mm is a great focal length. It has a built-in sliding lens hood - just like the 400mm f/5.6L. Tokina no longer produces this lens. One reason the lens is so cheap on the used market is that Tokina previously offered a 400mm f/5.6 lens that was not the ATX model and which was a stinker. A bit of its odor has apparently rubbed off (unfairly) on the 400mm f/5.6 ATX lens.

28mm f/1.8 Sigma
My least favorite lens. The image quality is not really great - especially wide open (and that is where I like to shoot an available light lens). However, my main problem with this lens is that it is only compatible with my Canon 10D and is not compatible with my 350D nor my 30D. The reason is that Sigma retroengineers their lenses. Sigma will rechip any lens that is presently in production free of charge. However, if Sigma stops production of a lens, you are out in the cold if you want to use it with a new model Canon DSLR. This is the older model Sigma 28mm f/1.8 lens and I am out in the cold.

I have not experienced this problem with either the 90mm Tamron nor with the 400mm Tokina.

claudermilk

Hmm.. good tip on the Tokina 400mm ATX. Gotta keep my eyes peeled.