Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 or Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.0

[bigben6]

So I currently have the nikon 18-105mm VR f/3.5-5.6. I like it because it had good IQ throughout all ranges, very flexible range, and has VR. It struggles in low light obviously and with a D40 anything above 800 is pretty darn noisy!

I borrowed the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 this weekend from a friend and shot it, expecting to be blown away, but I was a touch underwhelmed for a couple reasons, the biggest being that on a crop body 28mm is just not wide enough! I had trouble shooting a family of 9 in front of a xmas tree, with my current lens i would have had no issues framing that shot!

It also was a lil slow to AF which i accept as I am sure the $1900 nikon equivalent would be better, but i do not have 1900 bucks to spend on ONE lens, in fact 1900 is prolly my budget life time for allll my lenses!

So I had initially ruled out the Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.0 OS because of the variable aperture. But I have been looking at it again for a few reasons and was hoping for input.

The reach on the long end is as close as makes no difference for me. 5mm extra @ 70mm is not going to make or break a shot IMO. 11mm down in the 28mm rang is EPIC from what I have seen, thats obviously kind of big right there. I fully intend to get a separate zoom to get me to 200mm down the road.

Since the Tamron does NOT have any kind of OS or VR or IS, and the sigma does, even with a f/4.0 on the long end, if the OS is good for even 1 stop (4 stops claimed) I can shoot just as fast a shutter (if not faster), but admittedly i give up creative choices available with f/2.8. Given my current lens only goes down to f/5.6 @ 70mm I kinda think this is going to be an OK exchange.

Price wise they are too close to matter. In the interest of full disclosure, I would like ot end up with a good f/2.8 or close walk around (this lens), a 35mm f/1.8 prime, and a 70-200 f/2.8 for zoom. I'm a family guy, i shoot my kids, I shoot family portraits, I get asked to shoot little league baseball, basketball, birthday parties... you name it I am our family go to guy with the big camera.... so flexibility is largely the name of the game for me, I am not pigeon holed into one small sect of photography. Right now I need a good walk around lens that can give me better low light performance.

[kirbinster]

VR, IS, OS is not a big factor on a short to mid-length lens. The Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 is an AF-S lens but does not have VR. Bottom line on all of this is you get what you pay for. I had a Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 and loved it at first till I tried a Nikon 24-70. The sigma got sold and I bought a Nikon.

[bigben6]

The nikon still does not really solve my problem of getting back close to ~18mm, i feel like 24 while better is still a ways off price wise, 1900 vs 470 i know i get what i pay for but i have trouble believing that the nikon is 4x better given my stated purposes.

[graciousness]

I read in another thread that you only use your flash as bounce.

I think you are missing out by not using your flash outdoors and using as fill flash.

I shoot lots and lots of kids on the move, shooting families at parties, gatherings, etc and I only got satisfactory results when I started using fill flash outdoors. It really made a world of difference to my images and it also meant I could use faster shutter speeds to freeze those little fast-moving little tykes.

Before you go out and buying another lens, especially that budget is of importance here, why don't you practice doing fill flash? At the same time, practice how to underexpose ambient light and then using fill flash to fill in light on your subject where required. Especially you seem to want that wide angle or short distance to shoot, this flash is going to save you hundreds of dollars and will prevent the necessity of buying another lens. Especially you already have the lens that covers the focal lengths you want.

[bigben6]

Your right I do mostly use bounce flash but i have been experimenting with fill flash to eliminate shadows or deal with back lighting or less than ideal side lighting, but i still run into places that i CANNOT use flash like sporting events.

I have NOT used my flahs in the bright of day to freeze motion, i think my flash sync is 1/250 so thats not terrible, prolly good enough to kids in the yard.... ill have to try that!

[Doug Sundseth]

Note that it's not normally the flash sync speed that freezes subjects, it's the actual flash duration, which is much shorter. This is also quite difficult to do in daylight, since even at a low ISO and small aperture, the sun is bright enough to give you an image at the minimum flash sync speed.

If you want to freeze action with flash in daylight, you usually need to use either high-speed sync or an ND filter and a very bright flash.