tamron vs sigma 24-70 f2.8 - ii

Sigma AF 24-70mm f / 2,8 DG OS HSM Art vs Tamron AF SP 24-70mm f / 2,8 Di VC USD G2

Let's talk about two substitutes for cool in every sense Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8L II USM:

  • Sigma AF 24-70mm f / 2,8 DG OS HSM ART
  • Tamron AF SP 24-70mm f / 2,8 Di VC USD G2


Both lenses are well built and weigh a lot. The Sigma AF 24-70mm f / 2,8 ART weighs about a kilogram, the Tamron 24-70mm f / 2,8 G2 weighs about 900 grams. Feels about the same. Let me remind you that Canon EF 24-70 f2.8L II weighs 800g, which is lighter than these lenses.

Sigma's body is made of metal, Tamron's body is made of plastic.

tamron vs sigma 24-70 f2.8

The focus rings are both thinner and thinner, but you’re unlikely to use them often. From the nuances that I noticed, the Sigma has air coming out of the lens when zooming, which is bad because means that over time the lens will accumulate dust inside. When zoomed in, the Tamron makes a scraping sound.

But sigma quietly focuses quietly. A quiet focusing sound is still heard near the Tamron.

On the Chinese Canon R5 these lenses look like this:

  • Tamron AF SP 24-70mm f / 2,8 Di VC USD G2

tamron 24-70 canon r5

  • Sigma AF 24-70mm f / 2,8 DG OS HSM ART

sigma 24-70 f2.8 art canon r5

Auto focus

Both lenses focus quickly enough. There will be plenty of them for the reportage work for which these lenses are intended. But the Canon EF 24-70 f2.8L II USM is faster and quieter than both.

Image quality

In general, Sigma seemed to me better optically than Tamron. Not so that it is striking and significant, rather at the level of sensations. And here, again, if you want the maximum, you have to take the native 24-70 f2.8L II. He is better than both in the picture.

I liked Tamron's bokeshka more than Sigma. But Sigma is sharper at open aperture.

By the way, both lenses have built-in optical stabilization. Stab in Tamron for video filming according to my feelings, it is of little use. Even careful postings from my hands were obtained with tremors.

tamron vs sigma 24-70 f2.8 - ii

In general,

Both lenses are good. You can't go wrong with any of them. If you are looking for the 24-70 f2.8, then they can be seen as cheaper alternatives to the native Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8L II. But I would still recommend taking a native one, tk. it is objectively better in all respects. If you have a limited budget, I recommend looking at a lighter, more compact and inexpensive Canon EF 24-70mm f4L IS USM... Yes, less aperture, but if you think about it, you can live with it.

Sigma and Tamron are good for their money. They are just cheaper than the second 24-70 from Canon and about the same proportionally worse. So, if you want to save money, there are such options.

Video review of Sigma AF 24-70mm f / 2,8 vs Tamron AF SP 24-70mm f / 2,8 G2

Also read about protective filters for lenses

Review of ttArtisan 35mm f1.4 for Fujifilm

I am reviewing another interesting manual lens for crop mirrorless... I see that there are more and more of them. The question is, what to choose - 35ku from 7artisans or from ttArtisan or something else like that?

I had on tests lenses from 7artisans and they are, in general, very good. But this review will focus on a similar lens from another Chinese brand with a similar name.

As already accepted, the lens is available for various mounts - Canon, Fujifilm, Nikon, Sony and micra 4/3.

ttartisan 35mm f1.4 lens

ttArtisan 35mm f1.4 - standard lens for crop cameras. It has a high aperture ratio, pleasantly blurs the background, the angle of view roughly corresponds to fifty dollars in a full frame.

Focusing is average in complexity for a lens of this kind. 35mm f0.95 is just incredibly uncomfortable in this regard. Aiming at sharpness with your hands on the ttArtisan 35mm f1.4 is easier, it did not cause such frank discomfort in me.

The body is metal and well-built. I was pleased with the clicked aperture ring, which is definitely a plus for the photographer. The weight is not felt, very light - 180g.

On the Fujifilm X-E4 camera looks like this:

fujifilm x-e4 silver ttartisan 35 1.4

This is how it looks on the Fujifilm X-S10:

ttartisan 35 f1.4 fuji xs10

The ttArtisan 35mm f1.4 draws softly when open and gives very decent sharpness at closed apertures. To be honest, I liked this model the most from the lenses of this class. At less than $ 100, it's just a ball. Take it and don't think - my verdict.

My video review:

Later there will be a review of ttArtisan 50mm f1.2

ttartisan 35 f1.4 vs ttartisan 50 1.2

Tamron 18-400mm F3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLD review

Tamron 18-400mm f3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLD Lens for Canon EFSuper zooms this is a separate category of lenses. What does it have to do with Tamron 18-400mm F3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLD Is a super-super zoom. We have a 20x zoom on a crop matrix. If you stand at a football field, then with this range you can shoot about 2/3 of the entire field at 18mm and zoomed the player at the opposite end for the entire frame. Of course, this is very approximate, since fields come in a variety of sizes, but the zoom range is amazing.

I will clearly demonstrate the range of focal lengths 18-400mm:

focal length range 18-400mm

This is the first time I've encountered such a super-zoom lens in practice. I'm used to the 18-135mm crop range. When you pick up 18-400mm, it's a completely different matter. Despite the fact that the lens weighs only 700g. It seems a lot, but as for such a range, it is simply weightless. I compared the Tamron 18-400mm F3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLD with the Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L USM, and the latter weighs twice as much, but at the same time gives only 4x zoom. By the way, in my video review you can see test photos for these lenses.

Side by side Tamron 18-400mm F3.5-6.3 Di II and Canon EF-S 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 Nano USM:

tamron 18-400 vs ef 18-135When the zoom is fully extended:

tamron 18-400 vs canon 18-135

I also compared the Tamron 18-400mm F3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLD with the Canon EF-S 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 Nano USM. In terms of the zoom range, as I wrote, this is heaven and earth. But optically Canon EF-S 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 Nano USM surpasses Tamron's super-zoom in all respects, no matter how I test Canon's zoom is much sharper and more contrasting. And here we smoothly move on to the shortcomings of Tamron 18-400mm.

This is how they look side by side (from left to right) Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L, Canon EF-S 55-250mm f4.5-5.6 STM, Tamron 18-400mm F3.5-6.3 Di II and Canon EF- S 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 Nano USM.

comparison of telephoto and superzoom

What's the catch?

Naturally, such a range of focal lengths at such a price and such dimensions cannot be without compromises. The Tamron 18-400mm F3.5-6.3 pleased me at the wide 18mm angle and greatly disappointed me at the 200-400mm focal angle. At the long end, there is no need to talk about sharpness. Detail is frankly weak, chromatics above the roof and it is practically not treated. So, when buying such a lens, you must be prepared for sacrifices. Optics are clearly not for pixel shooters. The above category will love it very much Sigma 40mm f1.4 ARTbut sigma has a completely different usage pattern and a different philosophy.

Who cares about this lens?

Tamron 18-400mm F3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLD is designed for travel photography, that is for traveling... They are not interested in shooting brick walls, it is not very suitable for indoor photography and I would not recommend it for commercial photographers... This is a purely amateur lens that reveals itself when you want to capture everything around you with emphasis on detail. And at the same time, you do not want to carry a bunch of interchangeable lenses with you (as I do :) and think, which one is right for me now. You just put this super zoom on your camera and enjoy shooting. For shooting landscapes I really liked it. I will say that despite its optical flaws, I enjoyed it.

One more question…

Can I take pictures with a dark super-zoom at night? Yes, you can. But wisely. People - with a flash. Landscapes - with tripod... I took the shot below at 400mm at night:

shooting on tamron 18-400mm at night

Naturally, I had to use a tripod and slow shutter speed. But, by and large, this is true for any lens. None matrix stubs and other bells and whistles do not replace the good old tripod. Curiously, if you reduce the image to 2000 pixels on the large side and sharpen it several times, then the detail becomes quite acceptable. True, chromatic aberrations never go away.

More details in my video review:

Also see my review Tamron DI SP 70-300mm F4.5-6.3 VC USD