Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-03-2010, 05:51 AM   #1
Forum Member
houstonmacgregor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 97
tamron or sigma

Tamron 17-50 2.8 or the Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.


Which to buy- open to suggestions. How important do those who own the Tamron find the constant 2.8

Thanks

07-03-2010, 06:57 AM   #2
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,695
This question has been posed numerous times before. Check the forum's archives for discussions on this issue.

Fixed maximum aperture throughout focal length is important for many users, trivial for others - I prefer the constant 2.8 anyday, even if for the limited focal range.
07-03-2010, 06:58 AM   #3
Veteran Member
bimjo's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Pasco, WA
Posts: 967
Two decisions here: 1) which lens covers the focal lengths that you expect to use most often? and 2) do you absolutely need the constant f/2.8?

The other option, if you need both the range of the Sigma and the constant aperture is to just buy the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and be done with it.

Personally I'd take the constant aperture over the reach, but I like the shallow DOF at all focal lengths. The first lens I bought 6.5 years ago was the Tammy 28-75 & it's taken 75-80% of my pics ever since. That's dropped off some since I got the Sigma 10-20 & Tammy 17-50, but it's still hanging in there.
07-03-2010, 07:46 AM   #4
Forum Member
houstonmacgregor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 97
Original Poster
realize been posted before but they seem to be at least 1-2 years old and assume that there has been improvments in the lenses.

Additionally didn't sigma come out with a 17.70 constant 2.8 lens

And might try to save the $$ and get a pentax 50-135- interested in the weather sealing in that walk around range

Thanks,

07-03-2010, 10:03 AM   #5
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
Fixed versus non-fixed matters not a whit to me (I'd be perfectly content with an f/2 - f2.8 zoom), but f/2.8 does. The Sigma is not f/2.8 in any part of the range where you *want* f/2.8. Fine as a longer and arguably higher quality substitute for the kit lens, but if it's f/2.8 you want, get the Tarmon.
07-03-2010, 10:12 AM   #6
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,157
Consider the size difference vs aperture. Will having that extra extra reach on the Sigma be important? To me, a 17-70 would have more value than the fixed f/2.8. Your needs may be completely the opposite.
07-03-2010, 10:18 AM   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 691
I say go for the Pentax 17-70.
07-03-2010, 11:31 AM   #8
Veteran Member
bimjo's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Pasco, WA
Posts: 967
Sorry HM, I read your original post as being the Sigma 24-70, not the 17-70.

07-03-2010, 07:59 PM   #9
Veteran Member
Jewelltrail's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,180
QuoteQuote:
houstonmacgregor: Which to buy- open to suggestions. How important do those who own the Tamron find the constant 2.8

Thanks
As for your first question, I can not answer it--you must. I can give some feedback on your 2nd question though.

The 2.8 constant aperture of the Tamron lens is very important. And something to bear in mind, in a big way, is the Tamron 17-50 is splendid wide open. I do a lot of hiking in deep woods, where light can be scarce, and often go to 2.8. I don't think I need to say how important the 2.8 is when I move my shooting indoors.
07-03-2010, 08:41 PM   #10
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
Tamron for value. This and the 90 Macro are their bread-and-butter, dialed-in quality lenses.

The Sigma equivalents is their new 17-50 OS HSm at more than 2x the price.

As for the Pentax 17-70, that would rate higher to me than the Sigma, if you are fine with a stop slower, then that's the "better" lens.

I almost exclusively call my Tamron 17-50 my "indoor lens".
07-05-2010, 07:28 AM   #11
Forum Member
houstonmacgregor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 97
Original Poster
Now lets talk about longer lenses in the 50-200/300 range. I do wildlife as hobby. Suggestions welcomed
07-05-2010, 08:00 AM   #12
Site Supporter
Ahab's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oracle, Az
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 739
Tamron 70-300
Attached Images
     
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, pentax lens, sigma, slr lens, tamron
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Tamron MC4 1.4X, Sigma EX 1.4X, Sigma EX DG 2X Teleconverters OrenMc Sold Items 9 04-05-2009 06:06 PM
Tamron 18-250 vs Sigma/Tamron 70-300 ? simonkit Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 09-04-2007 07:12 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:31 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top