With very high quality and high performing lenses from the likes of Tamron, Sigma, Zeiss etc, is anyone using third party lenses and if so what?

I have been tempted to buy the Sigma 300 f2.8 DG, but it's more glass than I really need.

I bought a Tokina from an AR member 12-24 f4.
It's an older lens

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:
With very high quality and high performing lenses from the likes of Tamron, Sigma, Zeiss etc, is anyone using third party lenses and if so what?

I have been tempted to buy the Sigma 300 f2.8 DG, but it's more glass than I really need.

I read good things about the Sigmas, but don't own any. But if the Sigma 300mm f/2.8 doesn't have optical stabilization and the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 does, I would probably be looking at the zoom rather than the prime. New, I believe they're at a similar price point.

The Sigma zooms for APS-C sensor cameras, like the 18-35mm and the 50-100mm, both f/1.8, are considered the fastest and the best image quality zooms available in those ranges. The ranges are limited but I read that the results are immediately visible in your images, not just lab measurements.

One consideration is color and contrast, a reason many photographers like to use only one brand of lens. Every manufacturer has their own lens design philosophy, sources of glass, lens coatings, etc and if you want all your images to have similar color/contrast characteristics then you will tend to use lenses made with same design objectives. An editorial on this:

http://www.bythom.com/rationallenses.htm

I use a Sigma 150-600mm sport lens and a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 art lens; both have performed very well.

I used a lot of third party lenses - Tamron, Sigma etc. in the past.

But once I started using lenses from the same manufacturer - Canon lens on Canon Cameras - I gave up on third party lenses.

I found the results are not as good as with own manufacturer's lenses.

Mind you, this was many year ago.

I have one Rokinon 85mm f/1.4 AS that performs admirably. The rest are manufacturer specific lenses, Pentax for Pentax, Nikon for Nikon etc.

I am seeing more and more favorable reviews of the Sigma lenses. There are a couple that are tempting...

AIF YOU ARE INTO SHOOTING SPORTS - TAKE A LOOK AT THE SIGMA 120-300MM f2.8 LENS. THEY MAKE TWO VERSIONS - ONE FOR SPORTS AND ONE DESIGNATED "ART" - ALMOST PERFECT FOR HIGH SCHOOL SPORTS - DOWNSIDE IS IT'S HEAVY -- AND THEY SELL FOR JUST UNDER $3,000

I use two Tokina lenses with two of my Canon cameras. A 16-28mm f/2.8 for a FF camera, and a 11-16mm f/2.8 for a cropped-sensor one.

I use those lenses for taking photos of the Auroras in Alaska where I live. For sports and the rest I use Canon L lenses. One that I really like at the sled dog races and skijoring is a Canon 200mm f/2.8L USM (black color with a red ring).

By the way, if you use PhotoShop CS5 or CS6 you can use one of the numerous Lens profiles included. For my photos of the Auroras I most often choose Tokina profiles, but all the major brands are there.

I bought a couple of Sigmas when I was making my living as a wildlife photographer. Every thing was fine until the day a new Canon camera body arrived and the lens wouldnt work on the new body.
Sigma said tough shit. Never again.