08-17-2017, 06:42 AM
Quote:If you ever get hands on both lenses, you might ask yourself how much sense can be found in a comparison between these two.Well we all know that "bokeh beauty is in the eye of the beholder".
The Sigma weighs 1130 grams, the Tamron 660 (Nikon version). It's not just a bit heavier. It's super massive and needs a lot of space in a bag. So, by comparing bokeh, I strongly recommend to stay in the same class. Also, my impression is, that "bokeh" says a lot and nothing at the same time. Blur quality depends in my experience from a lot of parameters. It's very difficult to create meaningful tests of that - one has a beautiful background blur, but the foreground sucks as soon as highlights are involved, the other is rendering double contours, but only at close distances, the next gives a nice bokeh at the cost of massive aberrations... I think, anybody who dares to place a "bokeh" verdict, puts himself in a questionable position.
But I think both lenses do well......a portrait lens is a bit of a one trick pony....away from there it has little benefit in most situations over a decent 70-200mm F2.8.
The Sigma with it's size and weight is restrictive as you say.
I don't shoot many portraits so my clunky old 85mm AF-F1.8D will have to do, although the Sigma 150mm macro does a better job!