I am looking to replace the kit lens for my D5300 with better glass (within the same zoom range as kit lens). I intend to use it as a general purpose travel lens. I mostly like shoot landscapes and some landscapes of people in foreground (to share on social networking). I usually don't like to change the lens as I do not have any specific purpose to do that. I just want to take better pictures to share online and may be couple of prints for my living room. So I just bought just the body (found a good deal) and now I am looking to buy a decent lens that wont cost me arm and leg. The obvious choices were: 1. Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 2. Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 3. Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 4. Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 Did I miss any other $500 range decent zoom lenses? The first place I looked for reviews was DXOmark and I dismissed Nikon 17-55 as it scored the least and costs more. Sigma and Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 have very similar scores. Here is the link comparing them: http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/17-50mm-f-2.8-EX-DC-OS-HSM-Nikon-on-Nikon-D5300-versus-AF-S-DX-Zoom-Nikkor-17-55mm-f-2.8G-IF-ED-on-Nikon-D5300-versus-Tamron-SP-17-50mm-F28-Di-II-XR-VC-LD-Aspherical-IF-Nikon-on-Nikon-D5300___377_919_173_919_498_919 Although, DXO says that Sigma performs best at 50mm 2.8 and Tamron at 17mm 2.8. Can some one explain what it means? The difference between overall scores and sharpness ratings seem negligible. I did not read too much into scores other than sharpness and overall ratings. So my question: Is there any discernible difference between Sigma and Tamron? Is one better than the other from any real life/practical points of view? Technically both of them seem to be very similar. The other lens that peeked my interest is the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8. This lens seem to garner a lot of praise from many reviewers and photographers. I also love f/1.8 for low light conditions. But the limited zoom range is my main concern. Its also expensive (although not out of my budget) and relatively heavy to be a travel lens. I am still undecided about it and would love your opinion about using this as an all-purpose lens. I do use a tripod when I want to capture a good picture and without image stabilization, I am not sure if it has any advantages (for my preferences stated above) over 17-55 f/2.8. Unless you think that the IQ of this lens is considerably better than 17-55s. Any input/opinion/suggestion is highly appreciated. Thanks. ANSWER: This question has not been answered yet.  samjstern • Veteran Member • Posts: 7,018 Re: Sigma 17-50 vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Any difference? In reply to ukrishna • Nov 12, 2014 I have heard many complain about the sigma having a wide difference between samples. Some have said they had to get 2 or 3 lenses before they were satisfied. I would be careful. Nikon D70s Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.4G +15 more Westmill • Senior Member • Posts: 2,279 Re: Sigma 17-50 vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Any difference? In reply to ukrishna • Nov 12, 2014 3 Just buy the Tanron 17-50 Super Sharp, Super cheap, Super small, Super value Sorted ! I would also buy the cheaper none VC variant... its sharper ! Fujifilm X-Pro1 Nikon D4S Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-80mm F2.8-4E ED VR +5 more WouterD • Junior Member • Posts: 34 Maybe 17-70 f2.8-4.0? In reply to ukrishna • Nov 12, 2014 I've been looking into this choice as well, as a replacement of my 16-85. From looking around the internet, I've gotten the impression the sigma 17-50 f2.8 is deemed better, faster and quieter focus and in most cases sharper. Though the Tamron might indeed be a tad better on the wide end. I've also read that some people think the 17-50 lenses are becoming outdated and the newer 17-70 would be better suited for new sensors. I wouldn't mind loosing the f2.8 towards the longer end, sharpness will be my main decider. I haven't pulled the trigger yet, doesn't fit in my budget at the moment. But I'm still undecided anyway. Maybe a 16-85 f4 does come along in the future Good luck with your decision! Nikon D7100 Canon ELPH 300 HS Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Tamron SP 70-300mm F4-5.6 Di VC USD +1 more Rouxdy • Junior Member • Posts: 27 Re: Maybe 17-70 f2.8-4.0? In reply to WouterD • Nov 12, 2014 1 I just bought a Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4. Great lens! Based on the DXO specs, the human eye won't see any difference between it and the Sigma 17-50 and you get a little more reach and some macro functionality. You won't go wrong either way... Nikon D5000 Nikon D7100 Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G +7 more BillD7000 • Senior Member • Posts: 1,086 Re: Sigma 17-50 vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Any difference? In reply to Westmill • Nov 12, 2014 Westmill wrote: Yes, the non-VC is super, and the best of the lot was the original, but that used screw-drive focus, and wouldn't be able to AF on the D5300. Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC HSM Nikon 85mm F1.8G Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4E PF ED VR +1 more BillD7000 • Senior Member • Posts: 1,086 Re: Sigma 17-50 vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Any difference? In reply to ukrishna • Nov 12, 2014 The obvious choices were: The Sigma 18-35/1.8 is a gem, with great USB options, BUT that range may be too narrow for you. And it's not cheap. Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC HSM Nikon 85mm F1.8G Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4E PF ED VR +1 more avir87 • New Member • Posts: 10 Re: Sigma 17-50 vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Any difference? In reply to ukrishna • Nov 12, 2014 If it matters to you, the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 has a very loud autofocus motor. You can look it up on youtube for an example. If you are shooting in quiet areas where this is an issue I'd suggest the Sigma. I was also on the fence about these two lenses and opted for the Sigma due this factor. I could not find any significant image quality differences. Nikon D3300 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM Westmill • Senior Member • Posts: 2,279 Re: Sigma 17-50 vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Any difference? BillD7000 wrote:Westmill wrote:Yes, the non-VC is super, and the best of the lot was the original, but that used screw-drive focus, and wouldn't be able to AF on the D5300. Yes,,,, I missed the camera he was using Doh ! In that case I would opt for the one with VC but still the Tamron Fujifilm X-Pro1 Nikon D4S Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-80mm F2.8-4E ED VR +5 more BillD7000 • Senior Member • Posts: 1,086 Re: Sigma 17-50 vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Any difference? In reply to Westmill • Nov 12, 2014 1 Westmill wrote:BillD7000 wrote:Westmill wrote:Yes, the non-VC is super, and the best of the lot was the original, but that used screw-drive focus, and wouldn't be able to AF on the D5300. Wait up, I was talking about the original. The next version was a BIM/non-VC, and that CAN be used on the D5300. It is sharper than the VC one. Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC HSM Nikon 85mm F1.8G Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4E PF ED VR +1 more ForrestGump • Contributing Member • Posts: 763 Re: Sigma 17-50 vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Any difference? In reply to ukrishna • Nov 12, 2014 In my humble opinion, Sigma. You have a 24 Mpixel sensor, an amazing resolution...why do you want to damp it down with a Tamron? Tamron 17 - 50 & Sigma 17 - 50 has the same IQ when working on a 16 Mpixel camera, but on 24 Mpixel, the difference is quite visible. Moreover, VC makes a huge difference (when not using a tripod, obviously!) even at short focal lenght. When light is poor, a couple of stop are never to be refused. There are only two points I'd be VERY careful
Bye, L. Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Tamron SP 90mm F2.8 Di VC USD 1:1 Macro (F004) Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX II Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR Re: Sigma 17-50 vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Any difference? In reply to ukrishna • Nov 12, 2014 I have the Tamron (non vc) and it's absolutely tack sharp. A fantastic lens. Can't recommend it highly enough. Get the A16n model, that's the one with the focus motor. Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm F2.8G IF-ED VR Samyang 14mm F2.8 ED AS IF UMC Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 Di VC USD +1 more Re: Sigma 17-50 vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Any difference? In reply to ukrishna • Nov 13, 2014 I got the Sigma imported from Japan as it was much cheaper http://www.ebay.com/itm/161326638808 msc1 • Senior Member • Posts: 1,529 Re: Sigma 17-50 vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Any difference? In reply to ukrishna • Nov 13, 2014 ukrishna wrote: See your private messages. msc Tootsall • Senior Member • Posts: 1,812 Re: Sigma 17-50 vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Any difference? In reply to msc1 • Nov 13, 2014 If you decide to go with the Sigma 17-50 make sure that it has been programmed for the D5300 (there will be a sticker on the box) and test it for focus on your camera. I purchased the 5300 w/o a kit lens, electing to purchase the Sigma instead. The Sigma had to be returned to the importer/distributor three times before they got the focus right and I had to go and purchase the Nikon 18-55 kit lens for a vacation trip while the Sigma was out of service (or "in service", depending on how you look at it). The Sigma is good now but I would have saved myself a lot of grief if I had only tested it before purchasing ( No, it was not an Internet, mail order purchase). Nikon D7200 Nikon Z50 Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm F2.8G IF-ED VR Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX II +9 more samards • Junior Member • Posts: 41 Re: Sigma 17-50 vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Any difference? In reply to avir87 • Nov 13, 2014 1 My Tamron just arrived and from the first sight looks like very good build quality, I didn't notice any big noise so far, autofocus is actually very quick, comparable with my other nikon lenses Nikon D7000 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm F4G ED VR Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G gene57 • Junior Member • Posts: 48 Re: Sigma 17-50 vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Any difference? In reply to ukrishna • Nov 14, 2014 I'm very happy with my Tamron 17-50 2.8 non-VC non-BIM. Really sharp, great colors and contrast (on D7100). I also like the fact that is a little smaller, lighter and cheaper. Any of the lenses you are considering will be very good though, and apart from copy variation, very close in sharpness. So you can't be really wrong. -- hide signature -- Capturing the light Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Nikon D7100 Sony a7 Sony a6000 Nikon D750 +36 more Keyboard shortcuts: FForum MMy threads Latest sample galleriesLatest in-depth reviewsSony updates the ZV-1, giving the vlog-centric compact camera a 18-50mm equivalent F1.8-4.0 lens that's now wide enough for less cramped selfie mode videos. OM Digital Solutions has updated its flagship high speed camera just two years after launch. The latest version includes more memory and some performance and handling tweaks. The Fujifilm XF 23mm F2 R WR delivers a 35mm full-frame equivalent field of view and stands out due to its small size and weather-resistant build. However, it faces stiff competition from lenses with faster F1.4 apertures. In this review, we tell you what you need to know about this popular lens. The EOS R100 is the cheapest way to get into Canon's RF-mount system. But, as the saying goes, you get what you pay for, since its older components make the R100 feel dated. The Nikon Zf is a 24MP full-frame mirrorless camera with classic looks that adds the latest Expeed 7 processor and features such as 3D Tracking AF to the $2000 price bracket. We're not sure the experience lives up to the looks. Latest buying guidesIf you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites. What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best. 'What's the best mirrorless camera?' We're glad you asked. What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out. Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder. |
