Sony or Sigma Lenses? (Help!)

[conradcjc]

I am looking at these 3 lenses.

Sony
70-200mm f/2.8 = $1799.99
24-70mm f/2.8 = $1599.99
18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 = $579.99

TOTAL = $3979.97

Sigma
70-200mm f/2.8 = $799.00
24-70mm f/2.8 = $899.00
18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 = $529.00

TOTAL = $2227.00

If I were to buy Sigma I would save $1752.97

Is it really worth it to buy Sony?? If you took a bunch of pictures with all those lenses and separated them into two piles Sony and Sigma could you actually tell the Sony ones apart from the Sigma? Do you think they would be that much more stunning?

Any thoughts?

Thanks

[DonSchap]

Well, since I prefer TAMRON over SIGMA ... mainly because of QC issues, I really would not have a real substantial opinion regarding SIGMA.

I can tell you that the TAMRON SP AF 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD (B&H $729.95) shoots exceptionally clean and the image quality challenges the SONY. It is also $70 less than the SIGMA. Do you like money?

The real bargain, in my opinion, is the SIGMA AF 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG IF HSM (not the other one SIGMA makes, the MACRO.) That is a dynamite choice.

The TAMRON AF 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) (B&H $469.95) is also the top of the pile, in my opinion for this kind of lens. Also $60 less than the SIGMA. Remember, the SONY has the same lens elements inside it as the TAMRON. What's that say? Flip a coin. Forget the SIGMA.

Total cost ... from B&H: $2098.90

Those are my thoughts ...

[conradcjc]

Thanks for the input Don. Did you purchase Sigma lenses in the past and had a few bad ones?

[DonSchap]

Yes ... the AF 10-20mm f/4-5.6 DC EX lens required it be returned for calibration, right out of the box. Not to say that a couple TAMRONs did not, but this was a very noticeable error and when you are buying a lens, you really do not want to return it. It was gone another three weeks for factory adjustment.

In discussions with others, over the past few years, SIGMA returns seemed a lot more frequent and obvious. Again, in the past year it has gotten better, with newer releases, but that does nothing for those lenses still in the system, unsold, yet.

My advice, to everyone, is that no matter what lens you buy, mount it immediately and run it through some focus tests, on a tripod (where you are sure you have eliminated any chance of movement) and try it out focusing as close as the lens will go (M.F.D. is listed in the specifications), then focusing at 10 feet and then all the way out. While the long focus could be acceptably soft, the close focus cannot.

When you make the purchase, try and have that month of "buffer time" (for shipping back and forth) to quickly return it for warranty repair and adjustment, because this kind of thing does qualify as a manufacturer's defect and you need to have it addressed. If you find that your lens focus and operation is "okay", then practice with it, before the big event you might have purchased it for. But, again, put it through its paces as quickly as reasonable. Everything you shoot through it will be at risk if it is "out of alignment."

I hope this is helpful in your decision making.

[Anbesol]

I'll echo Don's sentiments towards Tamron.

But keep also in mind that the Sony gear is of significantly better build quality then either the Tamron or the Sigmas.

[Frog]

I suggest you also look at Tokina lenses. I have one and consider it to be my sharpest lens other than my 50.
Don't know what the prices might be for those ranges you are looking for but Tokina usually gets very good reviews.
I have a Sigma and a Tamron, and a Tokina and two Nikons.

[OldClicker]

I suggest you also look at Tokina lenses. I have one and consider it to be my sharpest lens other than my 50.
Don't know what the prices might be for those ranges you are looking for but Tokina usually gets very good reviews.
I have a Sigma and a Tamron, and a Tokina and two Nikons.

Won't fit. Tokina does not support the Sony/Minolta A-mount. - TF

[Frog]

Ah! Did not know that. I guess Tokina only makes lenses for good cameras then.

[Anbesol]

Whip out the tar and feathers!

GET OUTTA HERE!

But, that cant be true - I have the Tokina AT-X 400mm f/5.6 with a Sony mount.

[DonSchap]

Historically: Tokina made lenses in the Minolta-mount up until 2005.

After Minolta kissed off world-wide production, Tokina packed their part of the contract in and did not renew licensing with SONY, until late 2009. They have announced the first lens, ATX 116 PRO DX (11-16mm f/2.8), for the SONY mount. It is an APS-C lens ... like most of the current Tokina line. (<- click on this link)

The only two FF lenses Tokina produces are the AT-X 840 (80-400) and the 100mm f/2.8 MACRO, neither of which come in the SONY-Mount, as of right now. They are denoted with a "D". If it has "DX" in its name, it is APS-C only.

[Anbesol]

Damn Don, thanks for keeping track of stuff for us ;).

Don you must mean under current production, cause Tokina has a ton of full frame lens. My 400mm is full frame.

And wow didn't know that, why aren't they producing more full frame?

[DonSchap]

Use the link I provided in post #10 for the inside scoop on Tokina.

Have a great day ...

[jimkerosh]

I am a sigma lover all my lenses are sigma and really happy about them, I've many times to BHphoto here in NY and all the guys there have very good noesis of the stuff all of them are photographers... They told that they will not acquire a sony lenses. The only advantage of a sony lenses is the focus is faster...That's is...lenses wise....same. for 1/2 of the price.