[Roosterbooster]

Hi, I want to upgrade my "walkabout" lens (Canon 28-105mm USM). Two likely candidates are the Tamron 17-50mm, of which I've heard very good reports, and the Sigma EX 18-50mm. Does anyone have experience of both and what would they recommend? Similar spec and price and both get good reviews.

I must admit to being biased towards the Sigma. All the Tamron lenses I've handled in Currys seem lightweight and fragile whereas my Sigma EX 10-20mm wideangle could be used to stun an ox, it's that solid and well-built.

Any thoughts?

[GaryK26]

I have the Tamron and can honestly say that it is a great lens.
The optics are nice and sharp, and I dont have any issues with the build quality.

[dazza74]

Originally Posted by GaryK26

I have the Tamron and can honestly say that it is a great lens.
The optics are nice and sharp, and I dont have any issues with the build quality.

+1

[jonnypb]

Originally Posted by GaryK26

I have the Tamron and can honestly say that it is a great lens.
The optics are nice and sharp, and I dont have any issues with the build quality.

+2

Sigma let far too many soft lenses slip through QC for my liking

[senu]

Originally Posted by jonnypb

+2

Sigma let far too many soft lenses slip through QC for my liking

+3 for the Tamron.
Im "making do" with it after I had to let go of the 17-55 Canon EF-S USM IS 2.8) which cost twice but the Tamron isnt too far behind in quality
I think it is better than the Sigma
Saying that my Sigma 70-300 is well sorted

[RobDickinson]

Sigma does pseudo macro shots which I think is its advantage.

Also they do a HSM version for nikon.

[Roosterbooster]

On Amazon there are two versions of this lens - one is AF for £289.95 the other is £299.95. What does AF stand for here, surely not "autofocus", meaning the more expensive one is manual focus only?

[squizza]

I have the Tamron version, and although in daylight it is fab - a lovely sharp lens with build quality to match, in low light I find it hunts an awful lot. Also, it is quite noisy.

Hope this helps

Sarah

[JSW]

£250 here Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Lens

[Roosterbooster]

Wow! Great price but it's Nikon and I need Canon, which they don't seem to do.

[denno75uk]

When I chose mine, I also considered the Sigma. I have the 70-200 EX and figured the HSM and build quality would be great.
However, after reading reviews, the Tamron seemed to do better for optics and came more often recommended.
I agree with Sarah that the AF on the Tamron can struggle a bit in low light, but personally I don't find it is a problem too much. Read the reviews at Fred Miranda and it appears the Sigma is similar in this respect, which leads me to think that the HSM may not be as good as in my 70-200 (I have read that there are different types that Sigma employ, like Canon do with USM) and that consequently the EX designation for the Sigma is a bit of an exaggeration.
Whatever 'problems' the Tamron has with its AF motor, it certainly doesn't affect my overall opinion that this lens is an absolute bargain. Especially when compared to the Canon.

[JSW]

Originally Posted by Roosterbooster

Wow! Great price but it's Nikon and I need Canon, which they don't seem to do.

Canon mount Onestop Digital

? Do Canon, Nikon, Pentax and Sony/Minolta

Nikon Mount with Built-in Motor. - is just inform Nikon owners that the Nikon mount version has built in motor

[Roosterbooster]

Sorry, JSW, didn't notice you had to choose your mount. I'm not usually this dim, honest!

Well, thanks for the opinions everyone. Looks like the Tamron wins by a knockout and JSW has saved me £40-50. What a great board this is!