Tamron 24-70mm G2 or Sigma 24-105mm Art

[Abitconfused]

I plan to buy a "walking around" street photography zoom for my D810 without a very wide range and that has stellar sharpness & image quality. I am leaning toward the Tamron 24-70 G2 (f/2.8) vibration control or Sigma Art 24-105 (f/4) optical stabalizer. Dose anyone have thoughts concerning these lenses? thank you

[Geoff F]

For what it is worth; I have the previous version of that Tamron 24-70 and have found it to be an excellent lens. I originally purchased it to replace a Canon 24-105 which I have never rated highly. Yes, I sometimes miss that extra length between 70 and 100. My Canon 70-200 nicely pairs with the 24-70 but sometimes that requires a frantic lens change for a moving subject, etc.

[Abitconfused]

Your opinion and experience is worth quite a lot to me, thanks! I am beginning to fear that any 24-105 may be a bridge too far but I hope more opinions will be forthcomming. I have recently returned a lens I felt was just not sharp enough and deficient in color and contrast. I do not like to trouble retailors by being a spoiled brat but if I am not smitten by a lens...why suffer it?

[Polar01]

I am going to suggest a sweet little lens from Nikkor the old 28-70mm f3.5-4.5D. Again sweet little sharp lens, you can find used for around $90.00 US, small and compact it is a little gem I use it as a every day lens on my D850. Worth a look at.

Cheers: Allan

[Stagecoach]

I am going to ask if you have considered some other differences of the two lenses you have mentioned, disregarding anything to do with "stellar sharpness & image quality"?

One is faster, giving you better light performance and the added reduced DoF when required.

The other is slower but has a greater focal length range.

Why are decisions are never easy

[Abitconfused]

So true, decisions decisions decisions...https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compa...32_814_885_814

[DanK]

If I am not mistaken, that dxomark table includes the G1 Tamron, not the G2, and it doesn't have the Sigma 24-105.

I haven't used either of these lenses, but I have dithered about both of them often. I have the first-generation Canon 24-105, and from the reviews of the Tamron G2 I have read, it's optically quite a bit better than the Canon 24-105. I explored the Sigma 24-105 in the vain hope that it would be optically a lot better than the Canon, but from the reviews, it isn't much.

I think the choice is partly one of usage. I find that I am in the 70-105 range a lot, so having that extra length saves me a lot of lens changing when I also need the shorter range. Since I do a lot of candids, avoiding lens changes means making captures I would otherwise miss. So after much dithering, I decided that the extra flexibility of the 24-105 range is worth more TO ME than the superior optics you can find in some 24-70 lenses. However, it's clearly a tradeoff, at least at this time, and for some people, the better optics makes the 24-70 the better choice. I think if I did mostly landscapes, that would be my choice.

That said, the 24-105 does just fine in most cases. the lens profile adjustment is quite substantial, and there are downsides to brightening edges two stops or more, but the bottom line is that people don't look at the images I take with that lens and notice anything wrong with them.

Check the weights; if I recall, the Sigma 24-105 is a pretty hefty lens.

[Manfred M]

If you are looking at a walk-about lens for street photography, getting razor sharp images is going to be rather challenging, regardless of the lens you end up buying. The shooting conditions simply will not allow you use shutter speeds that will freeze any camera movement.

If you want absolute steady shots, a solid tripod is the only way to go and that hardly works in street photography.

[george013]

So true, decisions decisions decisions...https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compa...32_814_885_814

https://opticallimits.com/nikon_ff

George

[Hanginon]

"Walk around" and "stellar image quality" are almost an oxymoron. What I mean by this is - the wider the focal range a lens covers (i.e. more "streetable"), usually the more optically compromised it will be.

However, going to 105mm is real handy. I looked long and hard at Tamron's old 28-105mm, because it was one of the few with that coverage at f/2.8, but I settled on the even older Tamron 35-105 f/2.8 for better IQ. I have to believe a modern lens with stabilization like the Sigma ART is superior - if you can live with f/4.

[rpcrowe]

I am going to suggest a sweet little lens from Nikkor the old 28-70mm f3.5-4.5D. Again sweet little sharp lens, you can find used for around $90.00 US, small and compact it is a little gem I use it as a every day lens on my D850. Worth a look at.

Cheers: Allan

There are other lenses floating around that will work...

Along those lines, I was given a 28-70mm, f/1.8, Tokina ATX lens. This is an older lens that is a copy of the 28-70mm f/2.8 Angenieux and which is smaller and a lot lighter than the present day 24-70mm lenses and has very good to excellent optical characteristics.

This was designed as a full frame lens but, I have really fallen in love with the lens for my crop sensor Canon 7D Mark-ii camera when shooting people. A friend of mine picked up this lens used in the photographic sales area of Tokyo and knowing how much I liked the 12-120mm Angenieux zoom I used with my 16mm Angenieux motion picture cameras; sent it to me.

This lens doesn't have any image stabilization but that doesn't seem to bother me. Additionally, I don't regard the 28mm side as being too narrow, especially when shooting people. because it equates to about 45mm on a 1.6 crop camera, which in effect is a slightly wide normal lens. I don't get close enough to be troubled with large amounts of distortion...

28mm on crop sensor Canon 7D2 at f/6.3


And I like 70mm as a portrait length on a crop sensor because that equates to an equivalent 112mm focal length on a 1.6x crop...

This image was also shot at f/6.3



BTW: When I use this lens on my Sony A6500 adapted with the Sigma MC-11; the IBIS of that little camera provides image stabilization...

There are several editions of this lens available. The one that I have is the sharpest and the one that is labelled SV (special value) is not as good. I have seen copies of my lens on eBay from $100 to $150 USD. I don't know how much my buddy paid for this lens but, he is a great bargainer and probably got it considerably cheaper that the eBay prices...

[Abitconfused]

I agree a Tokina 24-70 is a contender. Yours seems quite impressive. Perhaps vibration control has made us a tad lazy? It does cost us a bit more... As for Tamron, DXO has not tested the G2 of a number of Tamron's recent spellbinders such as the 15-30mm G2. Not that DXO is necessarily our definitive guide. DXO tests a lens against a particular sensor, so how is a lens to compete with a Sony mirrorless 42 megapixel Alpha 7 (Sony Alpha a7R III)? Or a Fujifilm GF 32-64mm f/4 R LM WR Lens on a medium format Fuji for that matter. So our options are limited only by our meager allowance. However, its the photo really not the gear...



In truth, even though I am a pixel peeper, I enjoy the process as much as the product.