Nikon lenses vs Sigma and Tamron
I shoot with a D300. I own a 18-55, 55-200 and a 70-300 lens. I am going to start increasing my international travel and will be taking my D300. I am planning to purchase an additional lens 18-270 or 18-200 lens and want feedback on whether it is worth it to pay double for a Nikon lens. I am very hard on my equipment and that is a factor.
#1. "RE: Nikon lenses vs Sigma and Tamron" | In response to Reply # 0Photo_Art_W Nikonian since 21st Nov 2005Thu 21-Feb-13 06:55 AM
I personally would opt for the Nikon 18-200mm VR. With Nikons current rebate on lenses (until March 2nd?), a new 18-200mm VR is less expensive than a refurbished one. $629 Refurb versus $596.95 for a new USA lens at Adorama, prices may vary a bit at other dealers. There may be used ones out there at a fair price too...???
Others may comment on their experience with third party lenses you're considering. My most recent experience is with a Tamron 28-300mm VC lens which was just OK, and I ended up selling it. I also had a Sigma 10-20mm lens and it was OK, but I prefer my Nikon 12-24mm DX lens, better IQ just not quite as wide as the Sigma, but that's not a deal breaker for me.
I think 3rd party prime lenses are often more comparable in image quality to similar Nikon prime lenses, but their zoom lenses may leave something to be desired.
Being an occasional shooter/advanced amateur, I'm not hard on my gear like a pro would be. But even when I shot weddings years ago and was changing lenses or shooting with multiple camera/lens combos I was always careful with my gear as well so it would last.
The do-it-all zoom lenses you're considering are more consumer oriented lenses and may not be built to withstand the rugged abuse a pro may ask of their gear so I'd keep that in mind.
My Nikon 18-200 VR seems better built and more solid than the Tamron 28-300 VC I had. Also the Nikon 28-300 VR I just picked up with Nikons rebate seems to be a better build quality than the Tamron 28-300 VC as well.
Good luck in your lens hunt!
#3. "RE: Nikon lenses vs Sigma and Tamron" | In response to Reply # 2mklass Nikonian since 08th Dec 2006Thu 21-Feb-13 01:20 PM | edited Thu 21-Feb-13 01:21 PM by mklass
All super-zooms are filled with compromises, and the greater the zoom range, the greater the compromise.
The Nikon 18-300 is the greatest in zoom range, but produces images that are not a great improvement over any of the others. Arguably, the Nikon 18-200 is best because it has the least territory to cover.
The latest Sigma and Tamron are not really any worse in IQ, but you do have a max aperture of f6.3 as opposed to the f/5.6 on the Nikons. That can make a difference in AF ability and speed, particularly in marginal light. Build quality is quite similar for all of them.
I've owned them all, except the Sigma 18/250.
If you want to make get one of these, I would make your decision based on 2 things:
1- How much do you want to spend;
2- What zoom range do you need.
Once final thing you may want to also consider, if you decide on the 18-300 Nikon: Do you want something that large and heavy. It is twice the size and weight of the others. It is big.
Visit my nikonians gallery
#4. "RE: Nikon lenses vs Sigma and Tamron" | In response to Reply # 3NikonMark37814 Registered since 20th May 2010Fri 22-Feb-13 12:42 AM
Art, I agree with you 100% regarding the Tamron 28-300 VC and the Nikon 18-200 VR. The VC lens is okay esspecially if it's used at f/8, but the 18-200 is so much better and has a very reasonable price. If you have room in your budget you may opt for the highly regarded 18-300 as a one lens travel combo.
D2x, D300s, D700 & D800
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#5. "RE: Nikon lenses vs Sigma and Tamron" | In response to Reply # 4DelrayGran Registered since 20th Feb 2013Fri 22-Feb-13 12:57 AM
I have been researching this for 3 days. I found the Nikon 18-300 on sale at B&H photo for $696. with a polarizer and a UV filter. I think I am going to go for it....