70-200 Sigma or Tamron?

cwgirl197

Senior Member
I'm not sure if there is a thread like this or not, but I wanted everyone's opinion about which one is better. I'm sure there are mixed reviews, but let me know. I'm looking to get one of them and am really trying to decide which one!

Thanks in advance.
 

BeerBelly

Senior Member
It depends on what version of the Tamron you're looking at. If it's the new VC USD version, definitely go for that one. It's a very sharp lens and also fast enough for action. I use it and have no intentions of replacing it.
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
I'm not sure if there is a thread like this or not, but I wanted everyone's opinion about which one is better. I'm sure there are mixed reviews, but let me know. I'm looking to get one of them and am really trying to decide which one!

Thanks in advance.
What's the budget for this lens?

I can tell you I had a chance to play with three different 70-200mm f/2.8's before deciding. When the dust settled it was the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD that came home with me. It's a stunningly good lens that just about lives on my D750 but sees a certain amount of action on my D7100 as well. The Tammy is so fast and so sharp it's like having a pocketful of primes all rolled into one lens. It's a bit of a "tank", though, needing 77mm filters and tipping the scales at well over three pounds. Still, when you see the image quality... You... Will... Not... Care.
.....
 

cwgirl197

Senior Member
What's the budget for this lens?

I can tell you I had a chance to play with three different 70-200mm f/2.8's before deciding. When the dust settled it was the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD that came home with me. It's a stunningly good lens that just about lives on my D750 but sees a certain amount of action on my D7100 as well. The Tammy is so fast and so sharp it's like having a pocketful of primes all rolled into one lens. It's a bit of a "tank", though, needing 77mm filters and tipping the scales at well over three pounds. Still, when you see the image quality... You... Will... Not... Care.
.....

This is the kind of review that I wanted to hear. I was thinking of going with the Nikon, but I would rather not spend that much. I had leaned towards the Sigma because I own two others that I love, but I wanted good honest feedback so I think I'll go with the new Tamron version!


Nikon D750, Nikon D800, Nikon 16-35 f/4, Nikon 50mm 1.8, Nikon 70-300
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, Sigma 105mm f2.8
Sigma 150-600 C
 

carguy

Senior Member
Tamron > Sigma generally speaking, especially the Tamron VC and taking ART lenses out of the equation as they don't have a 70-200mm Sigma ART.
What are you shooting and what is your budget? Those are major factors in a decision.
 

cwgirl197

Senior Member
Tamron > Sigma generally speaking, especially the Tamron VC and taking ART lenses out of the equation as they don't have a 70-200mm Sigma ART.
What are you shooting and what is your budget? Those are major factors in a decision.

I have the D750 and the D800 both so that's what I would be shooting. I would buy the Nikon, but I can't see justifying that expense honestly as I'm not a pro. That's why I am trying to figure out which ones to purchase.


Nikon D750, Nikon D800, Nikon 16-35 f/4, Nikon 50mm 1.8, Nikon 70-300
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, Sigma 105mm f2.8
Sigma 150-600 C
 

carguy

Senior Member
I have the D750 and the D800 both so that's what I would be shooting. I would buy the Nikon, but I can't see justifying that expense honestly as I'm not a pro. That's why I am trying to figure out which ones to purchase.


Nikon D750, Nikon D800, Nikon 16-35 f/4, Nikon 50mm 1.8, Nikon 70-300
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, Sigma 105mm f2.8
Sigma 150-600 C

I meant what type of things do you shoot ;-)


With that gear and setup, I'd go with the Tamron VC all day long. Great glass and a 6 year warranty.
 

cwgirl197

Senior Member
I meant what type of things do you shoot ;-)


With that gear and setup, I'd go with the Tamron VC all day long. Great glass and a 6 year warranty.

LOL! Of course you did......It is snowing here and my brain doesn't work when it is cold! :). I shoot anything from birds to babies. I am a hobbyist and just do it for fun more than anything.


Nikon D750, Nikon D800, Nikon 16-35 f/4, Nikon 50mm 1.8, Nikon 70-300
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, Sigma 105mm f2.8
Sigma 150-600 C
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
This is the kind of review that I wanted to hear. I was thinking of going with the Nikon, but I would rather not spend that much. I had leaned towards the Sigma because I own two others that I love, but I wanted good honest feedback so I think I'll go with the new Tamron version!
I own two Sigma primes that I wouldn't give up for love AND money, but Tamron's 70-200 f/2.8 absolutely KILLED the shot time after time on my D750; I'd love to see what it could do a 36MP body like your D800. Be sure you're getting the Di VC USD version of this lens and you won't be disappointed.
...
 

BeerBelly

Senior Member
Just wanted to write up a bit more about my choice. I have compared Nikon 70-200 VR2 with my Tamron and while the AF speed did seem a bit better on the Nikon, image quality wise I couldn't find a difference between them. Color temperature is a bit warmer on the Nikon, but that is quite subjective which you prefer and easily correctable in post.

As for the lens itself, I can hardly find a fault with it while using it. It's my most used lens, sharp wide open and fast enough for most things...
Below is a photo taken at 200mm and f2.8, supposedly the weakest point of the lens...if that's weak, I don't know what sharp looks like :)

D60_6262 by luftwalk, on Flickr

And here a full size from the above photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/luftwalk/14217550690/sizes/o/
 

cwgirl197

Senior Member
Just wanted to write up a bit more about my choice. I have compared Nikon 70-200 VR2 with my Tamron and while the AF speed did seem a bit better on the Nikon, image quality wise I couldn't find a difference between them. Color temperature is a bit warmer on the Nikon, but that is quite subjective which you prefer and easily correctable in post.

As for the lens itself, I can hardly find a fault with it while using it. It's my most used lens, sharp wide open and fast enough for most things...
Below is a photo taken at 200mm and f2.8, supposedly the weakest point of the lens...if that's weak, I don't know what sharp looks like :)

D60_6262 by luftwalk, on Flickr

And here a full size from the above photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/luftwalk/14217550690/sizes/o/

Well, that is an awesome review and proof to me!!! I did end up buying the Tamron so I'm waiting anxiously to get it now!!! Thanks so much for all the feedback. It is much appreciated!


Nikon D750, Nikon D800, Nikon 16-35 f/4, Nikon 50mm 1.8, Nikon 70-300
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, Sigma 105mm f2.8
Sigma 150-600 C
 

robbins.photo

Senior Member
I'm not sure if there is a thread like this or not, but I wanted everyone's opinion about which one is better. I'm sure there are mixed reviews, but let me know. I'm looking to get one of them and am really trying to decide which one!

Thanks in advance.

My answer would be.. depends.

Lol.

Ok, little clarification. Sigma has made more than a few 70-200mm 2.8's, and so has Tamron. So really it depends on which version your discussing.

The older model lenses - Sigma's HSM-I and HSM-II without the OS, vrs Tamron's older model without the VC, I'd go with the Sigma's. The Tamron's without VC had a lot of reported issues with being able to focus in lower lighting, and they also had issues with front and back focusing.

The newer Sigma with OS vrs the Tamron with VC - if you can afford it I'd go with the Tamron. The Tamron model with VC is much better than the Sigma with OS. Sharper, better color contrast, etc. However for that price I'd actually recommend neither, I'd instead look for a used 70-200mm Nikkor VR I. It is a phenomenal lens.
 

cwgirl197

Senior Member
My answer would be.. depends.

Lol.

Ok, little clarification. Sigma has made more than a few 70-200mm 2.8's, and so has Tamron. So really it depends on which version your discussing.

The older model lenses - Sigma's HSM-I and HSM-II without the OS, vrs Tamron's older model without the VC, I'd go with the Sigma's. The Tamron's without VC had a lot of reported issues with being able to focus in lower lighting, and they also had issues with front and back focusing.

The newer Sigma with OS vrs the Tamron with VC - if you can afford it I'd go with the Tamron. The Tamron model with VC is much better than the Sigma with OS. Sharper, better color contrast, etc. However for that price I'd actually recommend neither, I'd instead look for a used 70-200mm Nikkor VR I. It is a phenomenal lens.

I actually found a phenomenal deal on the new Tamron version and am getting it tomorrow! Thank you for your response :)
 

rocketman122

Senior Member
tamron 70-200 non vc was crap. ALL sigma 70-200 are crap. I had the 70-200 HSM and they lack contrast and sharpness from 2.8-4.5 at f/5 they wake and then there is no use for them. all that weight and not useable. they are supposed to release a 70-200 sport edition thats worthwhile. the tamron 70-200VC is excellent. vignetting at the longer end. af is a bit slower then the nikon. not as sharp on the 2.8 at the longer end. would benefit from a minor aperture stop down to 3.5 then its gtg. great lens and not because of the price. though the front zoom ring is a pita. screws up my workflow. though if I needed a 70-200 itd probably be it. was considering upgrading to the vr2 but that breathing issue is a big issue
 
Top