Are Tamron or Sigma lenses any good? Do you have to buy a special attachment in order to put them on a Nikon DSLR?

Could I see some sample images of a Tamron or Sigma wide angle lens and/or a Tamron/Sigma portrait lens?

Thanks!

Huh? Huh? Any input? I'm comparing them to Nikkor lenses.

I have the 90mm Macro. Sharp, sharp pictures. Also a good portrait lens. You can see some of the macro shots (flowers) on my blog. Be careful with using it as portrait lens without some blurring (it will show every imperfection in spectacular detail).

-Mike

I have a Tamron 28-75 f2.8. Very sharp lens. It is highly rated by many. I use it as my main lens for weddings.

The only issue is that the focus sometimes has to "hunt" in dim light. I also have a Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR lens and when I use it in dim light the focus just snaps. It does not hunt at all like the tamron lens does on occasion.

Other than that issue, I love the lens. Good all around lens.

I have used:

17-50 Tamron
17-35 Canon

28-75 Tamron
24-70 Sigma
28-70 Canon

70-200 Sigma
70-200 IS Canon


The tamron lenses were overall pretty decent, but were all replaced by Canon.
The Sigma lenses were pretty good overall and were also replaced by Canon.

So in essence, the only thing I shoot with now, are Canon. I have a Tokina 12-24, and a Sigma 15mm Fisheye. Those ones proved to me that they were as good or better than their Canon equivalents, and have remained in my bag. The tamron and sigma lenses that I had used previously were good, but not good enough for me to justify keeping them instead of paying more for the canon version.

Jenny,

I have the both the Tamron 11-18 4.5-5.6 and the sigma 70-200 2.8. Both excellent lenses in my opinion, although I'm sure others might disagree. I was less concerned with Tamron than sigma based on product reviews and what not, but in the end, both are quality lenses and suit my work/budget just fine.

This pic was from my 11-18

Click to view attachment

the tamron 28-75 2.8 is super sharp, but I'll be replacing it soon as its AF speed in low lihgt is awful.

I agree with corey. My 28-75 f/2.8 is extremely sharp even wide open, but the AF speed isn't as fast as the Canon L's. But hey, it's $900 cheaper. So, I would recommend it without much hesitation. But it's really not very wide on the crop bodies.

I've heard a lot of good things about the 17-50 f/2.8. Just be aware that you may need to send a copy or two back to get a really sharp one.

Did you use Tamron or Sigma?



I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but are the Tamron lenses built to fit on a Nikon DSLR? Do I have to buy an attachment or anything to make them fit or will it fit right out of the box?

they come in different mounts, canon, nikon, etc, so be sure to get the nikon mount. This is the same with all 3rd party lenses.

Thanks, Corey.

I've got Tamron's 17-50 f/2.8 and I love it. Tack sharp. I couldn't justify paying twice as much for the Nikon version but am VERY pleased with it. You can get it in native Nikon and Canon mounts (be sure to order the right version) and it supports all of the camera's lens features as far as I know/can tell.

I don't have an image handy that I shot with the 17-50, but if you're truly interested in that lens I can find some and upload some high-res crops.

Jenny, I have the Tamron.

I bought a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 It was great...at first! Very sharp, nice and lightweight, and heaps cheaper than the Canon equivalent. BUT at about 3 months old the motor started 'squealing' when I zoomed in and out....as it focused (what an awful noise)

I managed to convince the store to replace it. The replacement is a DOG! I guess this is what's referred to as a 'bad copy'....(lucky me!...) It's sharp from about 40mm to 70mm, but from 24mm to 35mm it's about as sharp as fluff! I gave up....and bought the Canon (sweeeet!....but 3 times the price!!!!) I just didn't think the store would come at another replacement, another 2 months on. Maybe I should have tried...but oh well. One of these days I'll put it on Ebay, with a deep sense of guilt.....

Annie

i bought the new 17-50 f2.8 DX tamron and its a fantstic lens, and dont regret not paying the extra 1.5K to get the nikon. its a great value for money lens to leave on the camera!
Its suprisingly very sharp (we are trained to think that non nikon lens' are no good!!!), and works well on the digital bodies. Want some demo's of it?
most of the images of weddings on my website are shot with this lens (others with the 70-200 f2.8 nikkor, and 50 mm f1.4)

I shot a Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 for my first year of weddings, had no real problems with it... just the AF motor sound started to drive me crazy!!! SOOO LOUD!!! But other then that it was a great peice of glass and the price was right!