Tamron and Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 Autofocus Speed Comparison

darrenleow · 07-21-2011, 09:05 PM

You Tube

Conclusion: Sigma's HSM is noticeably faster and quieter than Tamron's screw-drive, but you already knew that

hcc · 07-21-2011, 10:08 PM

The in-depth comparative review at PF is relevant to the thread:
Fast Sports Zoom Lenses for Pentax | Sigma 70-200mm vs. Tamron 70-200mm vs. Pentax FA* 80-200mm F2.8

**EsBee** · 07-21-2011, 10:11 PM

Originally posted by darrenleow

Conclusion: Sigma's HSM is noticeably faster and quieter than Tamron's screw-drive, but you already knew that

What camera bodies were driving those lenses?

darrenleow · 07-21-2011, 10:35 PM

Originally posted by EsBee

What camera bodies were driving those lenses?

The same K-5 was used for both

darrenleow · 07-21-2011, 10:35 PM

Originally posted by hcc

The in-depth comparative review at PF is relevant to the thread:
Fast Sports Zoom Lenses for Pentax | Sigma 70-200mm vs. Tamron 70-200mm vs. Pentax FA* 80-200mm F2.8

The Sigma in that is the newer OS version which is a good couple hundred bucks more expensive than the HSM II that I have though

kent · 07-22-2011, 07:06 AM

sigma is not only faster, but more accurate too.

thirdofthree · 07-22-2011, 07:25 AM

The difference is clear when cycling fully from infinity to min focus, and back, and it seems at least in part due to longer throw on the Tamron. I wonder if the difference in time from start to focus lock when dealing with shorter throws would become negligible for my intended usage. Alas...only one way to find out: I have to try both.

Thanks for posting, I'm in the process of trying to decide whether to go Sig or Tam for my 70-200/2.8 (and kicking myself for selling my old Sig 70-200/2.8).

Originally posted by kent

sigma is not only faster, but more accurate too.

Is this noted from first-hand experience with both? Someone else's tests? Curious if there are other tests I may consider as I can't afford to buy both to do my own testing.

darrenleow · 07-22-2011, 08:17 AM

I just took the Sigma out and shot some normal static scenes with it. I can't tell any difference in autofocus speed or accuracy between the two in normal use. Will put it through its paces in AF-C, although the K-5 and Tamron combo has worked well for me so far in that respect.

kent · 07-23-2011, 03:43 AM

Originally posted by thirdofthree

The difference is clear when cycling fully from infinity to min focus, and back, and it seems at least in part due to longer throw on the Tamron. I wonder if the difference in time from start to focus lock when dealing with shorter throws would become negligible for my intended usage. Alas...only one way to find out: I have to try both.

Thanks for posting, I'm in the process of trying to decide whether to go Sig or Tam for my 70-200/2.8 (and kicking myself for selling my old Sig 70-200/2.8).

Is this noted from first-hand experience with both? Someone else's tests? Curious if there are other tests I may consider as I can't afford to buy both to do my own testing.

I have Sigma and also have tested Tamron. Tamron is ok for most situations, while sigma is ok for all situations. I took some pictures at late evening of Drift event, and tamron was noticebly slower and made more micro adjustments to achieve focus, while sigma was spot-on in most occasions. Tamron is not slow, however it is not fast either (compared with sigma). In dim conditions I found sigma HSM work better and more accurate. While there might be some reservations for sigma @ 200mm f/2.8, both lenses deliver good result. Tamron is better at the end of range, while Sigma is amazing in the middle (70-135mm).

thirdofthree · 07-23-2011, 09:22 AM

Thanks for the additional feedback and clarification, Kent -- I appreciate it.

TOUGEFC · 07-26-2011, 05:03 AM

Good comparison video Darren! Any chance of doing a head to head image sample test?

darrenleow · 07-26-2011, 08:35 AM

Originally posted by TOUGEFC

Good comparison video Darren! Any chance of doing a head to head image sample test?

I'll see what I can do later this week. Stick the camera on a tripod and switch the lenses for comparison real-world shots at f/2.8 and f/8, at different distances. Do you think that's a good test procedure?

I remember never being disappointed with the Tamron's stellar IQ, but with the Sigma there are a couple of times when I feel like "Hmm, that's a little bit soft..." It has a glowy look when doing close-up shots, which quite often is precisely when you want to avoid the glow (but it might be desirable for portraits) such as shooting big bugs like butterflies.

TOUGEFC · 07-26-2011, 12:59 PM

Yeah mate that sounds good, f/2.8 and f/4 i think would be better, at 70mm 135mm and 200mm.
Thanks in advance!

07-21-2011, 10:35 PM	#5
darrenleow Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Chicago Photos: Gallery Posts: 541 Original Poster	Originally posted by hcc The in-depth comparative review at PF is relevant to the thread: Fast Sports Zoom Lenses for Pentax \| Sigma 70-200mm vs. Tamron 70-200mm vs. Pentax FA* 80-200mm F2.8 The Sigma in that is the newer OS version which is a good couple hundred bucks more expensive than the HSM II that I have though Last edited by darrenleow; 07-21-2011 at 11:09 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sigma 80~200 high speed zoom	Scrib	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	16	03-02-2020 07:46 PM
Tamron Vs Sigma (Kit replacement) f 2.8 comparison	genez	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	05-10-2011 09:23 PM
Sigma 18-250 vs Tamron 18-200 vs Sigma 18-200	5150ds	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	04-11-2011 05:00 PM
Superzoom comparison? Tamron 28-200 vs Pentax 18-250 vs Sigma 28-300 etc	JayR	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	03-10-2010 12:40 PM
Tamron 70-200 f2.8 vs Sigma 70-200 f2.8 In Low Light	Christopher M.W.T	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	11-23-2009 03:57 PM

07-21-2011, 10:08 PM	#2
hcc Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,001	The in-depth comparative review at PF is relevant to the thread: Fast Sports Zoom Lenses for Pentax \| Sigma 70-200mm vs. Tamron 70-200mm vs. Pentax FA* 80-200mm F2.8

07-21-2011, 10:11 PM	#3
EsBee Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: National Capital Region Posts: 739	Originally posted by darrenleow Conclusion: Sigma's HSM is noticeably faster and quieter than Tamron's screw-drive, but you already knew that What camera bodies were driving those lenses?

07-21-2011, 10:35 PM	#4
darrenleow Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Chicago Photos: Gallery Posts: 541 Original Poster	Originally posted by EsBee What camera bodies were driving those lenses? The same K-5 was used for both

07-22-2011, 07:06 AM	#6
kent Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Lithuania Photos: Gallery Posts: 344	sigma is not only faster, but more accurate too.

07-22-2011, 07:25 AM	#7
thirdofthree Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Highland Park, IL Posts: 217	The difference is clear when cycling fully from infinity to min focus, and back, and it seems at least in part due to longer throw on the Tamron. I wonder if the difference in time from start to focus lock when dealing with shorter throws would become negligible for my intended usage. Alas...only one way to find out: I have to try both. Thanks for posting, I'm in the process of trying to decide whether to go Sig or Tam for my 70-200/2.8 (and kicking myself for selling my old Sig 70-200/2.8). Originally posted by kent sigma is not only faster, but more accurate too. Is this noted from first-hand experience with both? Someone else's tests? Curious if there are other tests I may consider as I can't afford to buy both to do my own testing.

07-22-2011, 08:17 AM	#8
darrenleow Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Chicago Photos: Gallery Posts: 541 Original Poster	I just took the Sigma out and shot some normal static scenes with it. I can't tell any difference in autofocus speed or accuracy between the two in normal use. Will put it through its paces in AF-C, although the K-5 and Tamron combo has worked well for me so far in that respect.

07-23-2011, 03:43 AM	#9
kent Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Lithuania Photos: Gallery Posts: 344	Originally posted by thirdofthree The difference is clear when cycling fully from infinity to min focus, and back, and it seems at least in part due to longer throw on the Tamron. I wonder if the difference in time from start to focus lock when dealing with shorter throws would become negligible for my intended usage. Alas...only one way to find out: I have to try both. Thanks for posting, I'm in the process of trying to decide whether to go Sig or Tam for my 70-200/2.8 (and kicking myself for selling my old Sig 70-200/2.8). Is this noted from first-hand experience with both? Someone else's tests? Curious if there are other tests I may consider as I can't afford to buy both to do my own testing. I have Sigma and also have tested Tamron. Tamron is ok for most situations, while sigma is ok for all situations. I took some pictures at late evening of Drift event, and tamron was noticebly slower and made more micro adjustments to achieve focus, while sigma was spot-on in most occasions. Tamron is not slow, however it is not fast either (compared with sigma). In dim conditions I found sigma HSM work better and more accurate. While there might be some reservations for sigma @ 200mm f/2.8, both lenses deliver good result. Tamron is better at the end of range, while Sigma is amazing in the middle (70-135mm).

07-23-2011, 09:22 AM	#10
thirdofthree Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Highland Park, IL Posts: 217	Thanks for the additional feedback and clarification, Kent -- I appreciate it.

07-26-2011, 05:03 AM	#11
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561	Good comparison video Darren! Any chance of doing a head to head image sample test?

07-26-2011, 08:35 AM	#12
darrenleow Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Chicago Photos: Gallery Posts: 541 Original Poster	Originally posted by TOUGEFC Good comparison video Darren! Any chance of doing a head to head image sample test? I'll see what I can do later this week. Stick the camera on a tripod and switch the lenses for comparison real-world shots at f/2.8 and f/8, at different distances. Do you think that's a good test procedure? I remember never being disappointed with the Tamron's stellar IQ, but with the Sigma there are a couple of times when I feel like "Hmm, that's a little bit soft..." It has a glowy look when doing close-up shots, which quite often is precisely when you want to avoid the glow (but it might be desirable for portraits) such as shooting big bugs like butterflies.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-26-2011, 12:59 PM	#13
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561	Yeah mate that sounds good, f/2.8 and f/4 i think would be better, at 70mm 135mm and 200mm. Thanks in advance!