Nikon & Canon's 70-200mm F2.8 lenses are one of today's most wanted lenses due to its zoom capability and max apperture of 2.8 but sad to say, both lenses are very MAHAL. For those who are not aware yet, there are 2 great alternative lenses (Sigma 70-200mm & Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 ) to choose from in case you cannot afford a Nikon/Canon brand.
Though the performance of these 2 lenses are not as good as the Nikon/Canon brand, still, these 2 lenses are very good alternatives. Good alternatives in terms of zoom capability, image quality, affordability and max apperture of 2.8.
Now, question is,
which among the 2 lenses (tamron & sigma 70-200mm f2.8 ) is really better? Ive been reading reviews about these 2 lenses and majority of the reviews concluded nga in terms of Auto-focusing daw, mas paspas daw ang Sigma compared to the Tamron pero in terms of image quality (sharpness of output, bokeh and etc.) mas better daw ang Tamron. Sigma is ideal for sports and fast moving subjects while Tamron is ideal for portraits and still life.
Nya one edge of sigma daw over Tamron kay saba daw ang Tamron during focusing because Tamron lacks the Silent Motor thing which is present in Nikon(SWM), Canon(USM), Sigma(HSM). Pero ang edge daw sa Tamron over the Sigma, mas outstanding ang output quality sa Tamron kay mas sharp ang mga shots compared sa Sigma. In terms of output quality, mao2 daw ang Tamron sa Nikon.
The reviews I've read come from people nga nakasuway sa 2 ka lens or bsag usa lang sa duha but still, I would like to ask ideas, opinions, comments and etc. from fellow Istoryans esp sa mga nakasuway sa duha ka lens or bsag usa lang sa duha. I know there are a lot of people out there sad who wants to buy a Nikon/Canon 70-200mm f2.8 but in case magkuwang ang budget, these 2 lenses (tamron & sigma) are great alternatives. Hehe..
Please share your ideas, comments and etc.
Tamron:
Sigma:
*mods pls close if thread already exists or if found unnecessary/inappropriate