Because if you need to be mobile, the Sigma weighs a heck of a lot more. The Tamron weighs like 2.5lbs to the Sigma's 4+lbs. Adds up if you are a hiker.
But, other than that, yeah, no reason to get the Tamron over the Sigma
2.7 vs 4.2, didn't consider that, though hypothetically you can carry a lighter body with the Sigma unless you're going to manually focus the Tamron, probably not light enough to make up the difference but it's a consideration. I'd use a long lens mostly for airshows where weight isn't too much of a concern as long as it's within the realm of hand holdable, and since I hand held a 300 f2.8 VRII with 1.4 TC on a D300, not a big concern with either of these.
Yup normal price. I got mine used for 450 a year ago. If your wondering about sharpness look through my flickr in my signature... but really check this set out (but don't look if you love bunnies...) http://www.flickr.com/photos/coas...626570024/
Decent lens for maximum $500-600 used, depending on condition. This new price of over $900 is what they usually go for and it is a very uncompetitive price. You have better options in that price range.
I've owned this lens, the Sigma 150-500 OS and the Canon 100-400L too. All 3 are capable of nice images (I have hundreds to prove it), but the Tamron limits you the most, no stabilization (no a big deal if you use tripods anyway), and its AF is slowish too, especially compared to the Canon, so not very good for action/bird in flight shots.
My copy that I bought used was very soft, I had to send in to Tamron 3 times by the time it was good. The 6-year warrany is a big plus though, and the lens is relatively light.
However, if someone has time and patience to search, a Canon 100-400L can be had for $1000. And the Sigma is also a better lens overall and can be found for $750-800 used. Heck, Lensrentals was even selling used Sigma 50-500 OS lenses recently for around $850.
Decent lens for maximum $500-600 used, depending on condition. This new price of over $900 is what they usually go for and it is a very uncompetitive price.
I think Tamron may not play so nice with Canon. I have noticed more issues with Canon bodies than Nikon bodies in various forums. I find the AF pretty quick for a cheap lens (way faster than the Nikon 80-400) Maybe you had a body that didn't have AF Fine tune? The lens is so light paired with the D300 it has a perfect balance and I almost never use a pod. I have gotten sharp shots as low as 1/30th sec handheld. http://www.flickr.com/photos/coas...205256567/ I don't know if you looked through my hawk thread, but that is almost all shot wide open, I don't think the Sigma would be as sharp. I'm sure the Canon is sharper, but I have never shot it. But if you can find a used one like you said 500-600, there is nothing that can touch it at that price point...
Slickdeals is able to share the best deals because of the contributions of users like you! If you found a great deal,
please share it with others by posting in our forums.
Welcome to Slickdeals!
Save money here by finding the lowest and cheapest price, best deals and bargains, and hot coupons. We're all about
community driven bargain hunting with thousands of free discounts, promo codes, reviews and price comparisons.
Don't worry, we'll help you find your way. If you haven't already, check out this
that explains the features of our site.