About
All Feedback (160)
smdservices (26459)- Feedback left by buyer.
Past 6 months
Verified purchase
Great communication. A pleasure to do business with.
oemassive-uk19 (97769)- Feedback left by buyer.
Past 6 months
Verified purchase
Quick response and fast payment. Perfect! THANKS!!
buy_gadgets (1268421)- Feedback left by buyer.
Past year
Verified purchase
fast payment, valued customer, pleasure to deal with. Thank You buy_gadgets
redbluephoenix (2586)- Feedback left by buyer.
Past 6 months
Verified purchase
Excellent buyer, thank you for your custom
cover4u (6032)- Feedback left by buyer.
Past 6 months
Verified purchase
Hope to deal with you again. Thank you.
jazzhomi_0 (6853)- Feedback left by buyer.
Past 6 months
Verified purchase
Hope to deal with you again. Thank you.
Reviews (4)
07 Feb, 2013
Tamron SP 17-50mm v Sigma DC 17-70mm test
Anyone thinking about the Tamron SP 17 -50mm has also probably considered the Sigma DC 17-70mm (you should).
Both are about the same price and both get good press reviews, but which is best? Well I have both and here’s what I’ve found.
Opened wide at f2.8 both are reasonable in the centre of the image, however the quality quickly fades towards the edges of the shot. In fact the edges are very, very soft on both. To be honest using f2.8 should only be used as a last resort.
Both lenses get much better at F6.3 and above. In my test the best quality was achieved at f13 on both lenses. Closed down further, I found the quality started to soften at the edges. Taken above f22 this was very noticeable, again it was the same in both cases.
So I here you say – “Stop telling me the obvious and tell which was better!”
Well at f13 the Tamron was the best across the entire image, even right into the far corners. The Sigma was a bit softer at the extremes.
Being ultra critical the Tamron SP was a fraction sharper in my test.
By the way my test involved having the camera (Sony A580) mounted on the tripod, shooting newspaper text from 2 meters, with a remote release.
So there you have it, the Tamron was a bit (and I mean a bit) better.
Question answered or is it?
In the real world the difference in image quality is just not that noticeable, unless you’re pushing things to the extreme.
Other factors come into play. The Tamron only has a 50mm zoom, the Sigma has 70mm’s and that can be very handy if you need to get that bit closer. The Sigma also feels a bit better made. The Tamron is a tad too plasticky for my liking.
The lens hood feels like it won’t last long on its mount. I’ve had the Sigma lens for four years and it’s had a lot of use and nothings dropped off yet!
So after all this anorakish waffle what’s my conclusion? The answer is there is no clear winner.
If you want the sharpest lens get the Tamron, if you want the most flexible get the Sigma. Whichever you spend your ill-gotten-gains on, you’ll have a winner. Both are big improvement on a crappy kit lens.
I hope that helps.
07 Sep, 2021
Canon 24-70mm mkii lens comparison 24-105mm L lens
Recently purchased this Mkii lens to complement a 24-105mm L.
Good points: sharp - even at f2.8 - well into the corners. However DOF is very slim, when wide open.
So in many cases you won't be shooting f2.8.
In comparison to the 24-105mm both lens are equally sharp at f8.
However the 105mm image quality tails off quickly at f4/ 5.6 - images are noticeably softer.
If you need a superfast lens the 24-70mm will be your first choice. The speed does come at a significant cost though, prices are sky-high.
If you don't need the speed, the105mm is still a worthy option at a third of the price; used. The extra 35mm's of reach is also a big plus.
A final thought - I'm just no good at getting sharp images handheld. For good results, I resort to a tripod. In that instance f2.8 isn't really necessary. The cheaper lens can generate the same quality at f8.
19 Sep, 2013
A580 a top notch mid-range DSLR
2 of 2 found this helpful I originally had a Sony A300 and upgraded to the A580, it really is a great bit of kit. The controls are intuitive, you'll get the hang of it in no time. I'd definitely not pay a premium for a kit 18-55m lens package. The only thing you can do with the kit lens is resell it. The performance is nowhere near good enough for the body.
Get a Tamron SP lens and you've a wining combination.
Picture quality, right into the edges, is nice and sharp. So is the low light performance, even at ISO 1800 there's little noise. The burst rate shutter feature at 8FPS is very quick - almost too fast.
In fact I reckon this camera is as good as models costing 3 times the price. I should know, I now have a Canon 5D mk2. I can tell you there's very little difference, no matter what reviews you may have seen.
I've owned both so I speak from experience, the 5D just has badge value.
I did not give it 5/5 because nothings perfect - eh?