# Best fixed f2.8 off brand lens for Nikon??



## eevoh (Feb 11, 2010)

I own a nikon d200 and im looking for a fixed f2.8 off brand lens that is under $600 with a zoom range of at least 18mm to anywhere above 35mm. 

A few that I have found so far are the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Lens and the  Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II Lens. Are there any other lenses that offer a greater zoom range & cost <$600? If not, then which of the two would you guys recommend?

I have read some reviews about the Tamron lens being slow at focusing under low light conditions but other than that, the tamron wins over the Sigma in every other aspect. What do you guys think? Anyone here who actually owns one of these lenses?


----------



## Goontz (Feb 11, 2010)

I have the Sigma and love it.


----------



## itznfb (Feb 11, 2010)

+1 for the Sigma. You need to get the* EX DC Macro HSM *though. There are 3 older versions that are crap.


----------



## Goontz (Feb 11, 2010)

eevoh said:


> ... but other than that, the tamron wins over the Sigma in every other aspect.



Are you sure that you were researching the newest one, as itznfb mentioned? When I was looking at both, my research led me to choose the Sigma.


----------



## dhilberg (Feb 11, 2010)

I have the Sigma and highly recommend it. As mentioned, make sure you're looking at the 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro HSM version.


----------



## eevoh (Feb 11, 2010)

yeah in my research i was comparing the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II Lens to the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Lens not the macro hsm version. 

Are there any other brands or lenses that you guys would recommend?


----------



## Dao (Feb 11, 2010)

I believe the HSM version of the Sigma is better optically than the non-HSM version for Nikon mount.


----------



## icassell (Feb 11, 2010)

I have the Tamron for Canon and love the lens.  It lives on my 7D >75% of the time.  It is sharp and solidly built.  Tamron also has a 6 year warranty.  Mine is the older non-VC version and I've seen them for sale used for $300-350.  I'm not convinced that you need VC (Tamron's version of image stabilization) on this focal length range. The lens is about $450 new without VC and $625 with VC on Amazon.

The only down-side to the lens is the lack of an ultrasonic motor, but it hasn't been an issue for me.  I've never used the Sigma.


----------



## kundalini (Feb 11, 2010)

I don't have any third party lenses, but I thought this was an interesting comment by Thom Hogan in his review of the Tammy.


> [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]_Wither the Sigma 18-50mm? _I haven't used it enough to review it, but I have used it enough to know that it doesn't beat the Tamron.[/FONT]


 
*Full review*.


----------



## R6_Dude (Feb 11, 2010)

Tokina 16-50 f2.8.  Gives you a bit wider view.


----------



## itznfb (Feb 11, 2010)

kundalini said:


> I don't have any third party lenses, but I thought this was an interesting comment by Thom Hogan in his review of the Tammy.
> 
> 
> > [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]_Wither the Sigma 18-50mm? _I haven't used it enough to review it, but I have used it enough to know that it doesn't beat the Tamron.[/FONT]
> ...



In this review he's talking about the 1st version of the Sigma. There have been 3 since. With the 4th gen being the one of concern here. The first 2 version had very poor optics and very inconsistent production. The 3rd version had decent optics but very inconsistent production as well as loud AF. The 4th version they got it right and are producing a high rate of good copies. I really haven't heard anyone talk about a bad copy of the current version.


----------



## Dao (Feb 11, 2010)

But the interesting thing is for some reason, Sigma did not release the HSM version with Canon mount.  Don't know why.
I am using the Tamron F/2.8 with my Canon camera.  And I like it.


----------



## Darkhunter139 (Feb 11, 2010)

I have been thinking about getting the Tamron 17-50mm for a while now. 

Beach Camera sells them refurbished for $329 and comes with a 1 year warranty 

Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD [IF] SP AF Zoom Lens - eBay (item 110490630047 end time Mar-07-10 08:45:34 PST)


----------



## Dao (Feb 11, 2010)

I think that is a pretty good price when the lens sell at $300 - $350 in used market
Also, Promaster has one which is a rebadged Tamon.

i.e. 

Canon mount
Promaster 17-50mm F/2.8 Digital XR EDO Aspherical Auto Focus Zoom Lens for Canon EOS Digital 5796 : Wolfe's Camera Shop

Nikon mount
Promaster 17-50mm F/2.8 Digital XR EDO Aspherical Auto Focus Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital 5803 : Wolfe's Camera Shop


----------



## itznfb (Feb 11, 2010)

Yea I always thought it was a horrible decision to not release a Canon mount for the HSM Macro. They didn't even release it for their own mount. Strange.


----------



## eevoh (Feb 11, 2010)

Any comments about front focusing issues in low light situations? I have read a few reviews on B&H stating that they had this problem


----------



## icassell (Feb 11, 2010)

No front/rear focus issues with my Tamron.


----------



## itznfb (Feb 11, 2010)

eevoh said:


> Any comments about front focusing issues in low light situations? I have read a few reviews on B&H stating that they had this problem



The Sigma hunts pretty bad in low light from my experience but once it locked on it was always accurate.


----------



## eevoh (Feb 11, 2010)

icassell said:


> No front/rear focus issues with my Tamron.


 


itznfb said:


> eevoh said:
> 
> 
> > Any comments about front focusing issues in low light situations? I have read a few reviews on B&H stating that they had this problem
> ...



Hmmm that may be a problem because the reason why I want a fixed f2.8 lens is because i will most likely be using this for indoor shootings but if the lens is slow at focusing, i might have consider the tamron.

btw icassell, do you think you can post some indoor pics taken with the tamron lens?


----------



## Goontz (Feb 11, 2010)

I haven't noticed any focusing issues, but maybe it's just me simply not realizing them. I might have to do some playing/testing with it later this evening.


----------



## PhotoXopher (Feb 11, 2010)

Another Sigma vote here, I tried the Tamron first and it malfunctioned on the D90. Never had a single problem with the Sigma (knock on wood).

Focus is fast and accurate as can be, in low light my experience has been quite positive as well.


----------



## icassell (Feb 11, 2010)

I'll try to remember when I get home ....

Here's a couple of links in the meantime ...

photoSIG » Lens: Tamron 17 - 50mm f2.8

http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/browse?id=37407

http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/browse?id=47140


----------



## eevoh (Feb 11, 2010)

icassell said:


> I'll try to remember when I get home ....
> 
> Here's a couple of links in the meantime ...
> 
> ...




lol thanks a lot icassell but if its a hassle dont even worry about it 

and this is why deciding on which lens to buy is a hard task... every person on this board has had a different experience with each lens. theres no guarantee that the tamron or sigma will work perfectly with my camera so i guess in the end, it just comes down to...luck?


----------



## PhotoXopher (Feb 11, 2010)

Well you just have to pay close attention to which version people are referencing.


----------



## Dao (Feb 11, 2010)

Not low light stuff ... but this photo was taken with my Tamron 17-50mm


----------



## eevoh (Feb 11, 2010)

any comments on the Tokina 									Zoom Super Wide Angle 16-50mm f/2.8 AT-X 165 PRO DX Autofocus Lens for Nikon Digital


----------



## icassell (Feb 11, 2010)

Here's one with the Tamron and my 30D  handheld in available light indoors at St. Marks Cathedral in Venice:

Shot at 22mm f/2.8 1/80sec ISO 400


----------



## PhotoXopher (Feb 11, 2010)

Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 HSM Macro 100% Crop


----------



## eevoh (Feb 11, 2010)

nice thanks guys

is this a good time to buy either the sigma or tamron lens? meaning i dont want to buy the lens today then in a month, they release a new version of the lens which results in a price drop of the previous lens..

i guess the real question is will sigma or tamron release newer models of these lenses in the near future? (near meaning 1-3 months)


----------



## icassell (Feb 11, 2010)

Since the VC version of the Tamron is relatively new, I don't see them releasing a new one in the short-term.


----------



## R6_Dude (Feb 11, 2010)

eevoh said:


> any comments on the Tokina                                     Zoom Super Wide Angle 16-50mm f/2.8 AT-X 165 PRO DX Autofocus Lens for Nikon Digital


 
I am most likely going to pick this one up for my canon.  I like the extra 2mm on the wide end.


----------



## icassell (Feb 11, 2010)

R6_Dude said:


> eevoh said:
> 
> 
> > any comments on the Tokina                                     Zoom Super Wide Angle 16-50mm f/2.8 AT-X 165 PRO DX Autofocus Lens for Nikon Digital
> ...



If you're not planning on getting a UWA, that is not a bad thought.  My 10-20 covers that wide range, though.


----------



## R6_Dude (Feb 11, 2010)

icassell said:


> R6_Dude said:
> 
> 
> > eevoh said:
> ...


 
I originally wanted the 11-16mm, but on a bit of a budget now and the 16-50mm would be the best bang for the buck lens that covers a good amount of focal length, so I'll just take a few steps back for that "perfect shot" haha.  

This lens would be great if you are looking for a fast and a bit wider lens.  Most other UWA are only at f3.5.


----------



## eevoh (Feb 11, 2010)

is UWA a canon term? 
and besides the fact that it has an extra 2mm on the wide end, any comments on the sharpness, speed in low light situations, ergonomics, etc..?


edit//
is that extra $120 worth it for 2mm?


----------



## Goontz (Feb 11, 2010)

UWA = Ultra Wide Angle. Not canon-specific. Typically your 10-20mm ranges.


----------



## R6_Dude (Feb 11, 2010)

eevoh said:


> is UWA a canon term?
> and besides the fact that it has an extra 2mm on the wide end, any comments on the sharpness, speed in low light situations, ergonomics, etc..?
> 
> 
> ...


 
Thats debateable because you can just take a couple of steps back.  The reason I brought it up was b/c I wanted a lens that was a fixed f2.8 as well, but I also wanted a Ultra Wide Angle lens.  But I came to realize that I'll use this lens much more often than a 11-16 f2.8.

Sharpness/ergonomics I can't say much as I haven't shot with it myself.  As for speed in low light situations, at f2.8 I think its great and fast enough.


----------



## eevoh (Feb 11, 2010)

R6_Dude said:


> eevoh said:
> 
> 
> > is UWA a canon term?
> ...



actually, by speed i meant focusing speed
sorry for the misconception

i guess i'll just have to go down to the store to try out these lenses before deciding on which one to buy


----------



## eevoh (Feb 13, 2010)

sorry to bring this thread up again but i just wanted some final thoughts.
 i have decided to buy the tokina 16-50mm lens. 

are there any cons that i should know about that would cause me to change my decision??


----------



## sterlingp (Apr 6, 2010)

so did you purchase the Tokina?  I too am thinking of purchasing it.  How do you like it so far?


----------



## sterlingp (Apr 6, 2010)

or should I get this one.....Tamron SP 17-50mm F/2.8 F2.8 VC XR Di II LENS Nikon


----------



## eevoh (Apr 7, 2010)

Yes, I ended up purchasing the tokina 16-50mm. To be honest, I am not  totally satisfied with it. The main reason why I bought a fixed f2.8 is  to take pictures indoors under decent lighting conditions and I find  that this lens has an extremely hard time focusing on subjects. Even  under great lighting, this lens has a tough time focusing on a subject of solid color; for example a wall. I also used this lens to take night  scene photos and it had an extremely extremely hard time  focusing at 16mm. At 50mm, it focused fine but at 16mm it took forever to focus. I actually had to manually focus to infinity for a lot of the pictures. All of the pictures were taken at apertures higher than 5.6  and they came out a bit too soft for my taste.

I also recently went on a cruise vacation and I took a lot of pictures on  the ship(indoors) and most of the pictures came out extremely soft at  f2.8.

On the other hand, Tokina has superb build quality. It looks extremely nice on the camera and feels great on the hand(although its heavy). It does have a little creep but thats not a problem for me.

The reason why I chose tokina over sigma is because sigma, for  some odd reason, decided to reverse the zoom direction of the lens. The reason why  I chose tokina over tamron is because of the build quality and the 16mm it offers  over the 17mm tamron and 18mm sigma.

So I guess the questions are - is build quality important to you?, do you care about which direction the zoom ring goes?, will the speed of focusing matter?, do you really need that extra 1-2mm that the tokina offers? and will you be using this lens mainly for indoor photography? if your answers are yes yes no yes no then you should buy this lens. lol

P.S. - This lens is great for outdoors. It has some great blues. When taking pictures during the day, the sky comes out amazing in my opinion.


----------



## sterlingp (Apr 7, 2010)

odd my answers are reverse....so I shouldn't buy this lens ....get the tamaron I am now thinking.....though I hear a lot about good and bad copies....maybe you got a bad copy?
   Quality.....yes but optical quality is more important than cosmetic and "look" quality
 I want sharpness & fast,...
Zoom ring direction...no doesn't bother me yet
Speed of focus....yes I want fast 
Do I "need" the xtra 1-2 mm? ....no, but it would be nice just in case 
mainly indoor...50/50....


----------



## icassell (Apr 7, 2010)

I have had my Tamron 17-50mm for over 3 years (I got it before they had the VC version and, frankly, don't think I would spend the extra money for the image stabilizer).  It's interesting that you've heard a lot about bad copies, because I've never heard that complaint about this lens.  The build is solid and I give it a lot of use (abuse). Tamron also has an excellent (6 year) warranty. I love the lens.


----------

