When it comes to wide-angle zoom lenses for Sony E-mount cameras, two options consistently dominate the conversation: the Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD and the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN Art. I’ve spent countless hours testing both lenses in various conditions to help you decide which one deserves a spot in your camera bag. Both lenses offer constant f/2.8 apertures and are designed specifically for Sony mirrorless cameras, but they differ significantly in focal range, optical performance, and handling characteristics. The Tamron 17-28mm is more compact and lighter, making it ideal for travel and everyday use, while the Sigma 14-24mm offers a wider field of view and superior corner-to-corner sharpness, perfect for landscape and architectural photography. Your choice ultimately depends on your specific photography needs and priorities.
Meet the Contenders: Tamron 17-28mm vs Sigma 14-24mm
Before diving into the nitty-gritty details, let’s get acquainted with both lenses.
Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD
The Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 is part of Tamron’s lightweight lens series for Sony full-frame mirrorless cameras. When I first picked up this lens, I was immediately impressed by its compact size and weight. At just 420g (14.8 oz) and 99mm (3.9 in) long, it’s one of the smallest full-frame f/2.8 wide-angle zooms on the market.
The lens features Tamron’s RXD (Rapid eXtra-silent stepping Drive) autofocus motor, which promises fast and quiet operation. It’s also weather-sealed, with a moisture-resistant construction that gives me confidence when shooting in challenging conditions.
What I particularly love about the Tamron is its versatility. The 17-28mm range covers the most commonly used wide-angle focal lengths, making it suitable for everything from landscapes to environmental portraits.
Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN Art
The Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN Art is part of Sigma’s prestigious Art line, designed specifically for mirrorless cameras. When I first unboxed this lens, I was struck by its solid build quality and professional feel. It’s noticeably larger and heavier than the Tamron, weighing 795g (28 oz) and measuring 143.5mm (5.65 in) long.
The lens features Sigma’s latest optical design, including several low-dispersion and aspherical elements to control aberrations. It also has a hypersonic motor (HSM) for autofocus, which promises fast and accurate focusing performance.
What sets the Sigma apart is its wider focal range, starting at 14mm – significantly wider than the Tamron’s 17mm. This makes it particularly appealing for landscape and architectural photographers who need that extra width.
Physical Comparison: Size, Weight, and Build Quality
One of the most noticeable differences between these two lenses is their physical characteristics. Let’s break down how they compare.
Size and Weight
The Tamron 17-28mm is the clear winner if portability is your priority. At 420g and 99mm long, it’s remarkably compact for a full-frame f/2.8 wide-angle zoom. I’ve taken this lens on countless trips, and I barely notice it in my camera bag. When mounted on my Sony A7III, the balance feels perfect, and I can shoot handheld for extended periods without fatigue.
The Sigma 14-24mm, on the other hand, is substantially larger and heavier. At 795g and 143.5mm long, it’s almost twice the weight of the Tamron and significantly longer. When I first started using this lens, I noticed the extra weight immediately, especially during long shooting sessions. However, the larger size does provide a more substantial grip, which some photographers might prefer.
Build Quality
Both lenses feature excellent build quality, but with different approaches.
The Tamron 17-28mm has a moisture-resistant construction with sealing at the mount and other critical areas. While it doesn’t feel as premium as the Sigma, it’s well-built and has held up well during my outdoor adventures. The zoom and focus rings are smooth but not damped like higher-end lenses.
The Sigma 14-24mm features Sigma’s “Thermally Stable Composite” (TSC) material and brass mounts, giving it a more premium feel. The lens is also dust and splash-proof, with a more robust weather-sealing system than the Tamron. The zoom and focus rings are beautifully damped and feel precise, similar to Sony’s G Master lenses.
Filter Compatibility
Filter compatibility is a significant consideration for many photographers, and this is where these lenses differ dramatically.
The Tamron 17-28mm has a standard 67mm filter thread, which is a huge advantage. I can use regular circular polarizers, ND filters, and other creative filters without any special adapters. This has saved me both money and hassle in the field.
The Sigma 14-24mm, due to its large front element and bulbous design, cannot accept standard filters. Instead, it requires a dedicated filter holder system that attaches to the lens hood. These systems are expensive and add bulk to an already large lens. For my landscape work, this has been a significant inconvenience, as I rely heavily on ND and polarizing filters.
Optical Performance: Sharpness, Distortion, and Aberrations
Optical performance is where the rubber meets the road for any lens comparison. Let’s examine how these two lenses stack up.
Sharpness
Sharpness is one of the most critical factors for lens quality, and both lenses perform well in this regard, but with some differences.
The Tamron 17-28mm delivers excellent sharpness in the center and mid-frame at all focal lengths and apertures. When I’m shooting landscapes at f/5.6-f/8, the center sharpness is outstanding. However, like many wide-angle zooms, the corners show some softness wide open, improving significantly when stopped down to f/5.6 or smaller. At 17mm, the corners are noticeably soft at f/2.8 but become quite good by f/5.6.
The Sigma 14-24mm sets a high bar for sharpness, even by Sigma’s Art line standards. What impressed me most is the corner-to-corner sharpness, even wide open. At 14mm and f/2.8, the corners are remarkably sharp, something I rarely see in ultra-wide-angle lenses. By f/4, the entire frame is tack-sharp. This performance is consistent across the focal range, though there’s a slight drop in sharpness at 24mm compared to the wider end.
Distortion
Wide-angle lenses inevitably exhibit some distortion, but both lenses handle it reasonably well.
The Tamron 17-28mm shows moderate barrel distortion at 17mm, which is typical for this focal length. The distortion decreases as you zoom toward 28mm, becoming almost negligible at the long end. I’ve found that Lightroom and Capture One’s distortion correction profiles work well for this lens, effectively eliminating visible distortion with a single click.
The Sigma 14-24mm exhibits more pronounced barrel distortion at 14mm, which is expected for such an extreme wide-angle. The distortion is complex, with some mustache distortion characteristics that make it slightly more challenging to correct perfectly. However, Sigma’s correction profiles in Lightroom do an excellent job of taming this distortion when needed.
Chromatic Aberration
Chromatic aberration (CA) is those annoying purple or green fringes that appear in high-contrast areas of an image. Both lenses control CA well, but with some differences.
The Tamron 17-28mm shows moderate lateral CA (color fringing along edges) at all focal lengths, especially wide open. Longitudinal CA (color fringing in front of and behind the focus plane) is also present but well-controlled. I’ve found that CA is easily correctable in post-processing with Lightroom’s automatic CA removal.
The Sigma 14-24mm exhibits less lateral CA than the Tamron, which is impressive for such a wide lens. Longitudinal CA is also very well-controlled, even wide open. In my high-contrast test shots, the Sigma showed significantly less color fringing than the Tamron, especially in the corners.
Vignetting
Vignetting, or darkening of the corners, is common in wide-angle lenses, especially at wide apertures.
The Tamron 17-28mm shows noticeable vignetting wide open at all focal lengths, which is typical for f/2.8 wide-angle zooms. At 17mm and f/2.8, the corners are about 2.5 stops darker than the center. Stopping down to f/4 reduces vignetting significantly, and by f/5.6, it’s barely noticeable.
The Sigma 14-24mm exhibits even more pronounced vignetting at 14mm and f/2.8, with corners approximately 3 stops darker than the center. This is expected for such an extreme wide-angle lens. Stopping down helps, but even at f/5.6, some vignetting remains. However, the vignetting can be easily corrected in post-processing, and some photographers even prefer the look for certain images.
Flare and Ghosting
Both lenses perform well when it comes to controlling flare and ghosting, but with some differences.
The Tamron 17-28mm has Tamron’s BBAR (Broad-Band Anti-Reflection) coating, which does a good job of reducing flare and ghosting in most situations. When shooting directly into the sun, I’ve noticed some loss of contrast and some ghosting, but it’s well-controlled compared to many other wide-angle lenses.
The Sigma 14-24mm features Sigma’s Super Multi-Layer Coating, which provides excellent resistance to flare and ghosting. In my testing, the Sigma performed slightly better than the Tamron when shooting into bright light sources, maintaining better contrast and showing fewer ghosting artifacts.
Autofocus Performance
Autofocus performance is crucial for many types of photography, especially when shooting moving subjects or in low light.
Tamron 17-28mm Autofocus
The Tamron 17-28mm uses Tamron’s RXD (Rapid eXtra-silent stepping Drive) autofocus motor. In my experience, the autofocus is fast, quiet, and accurate for most situations. When shooting landscapes or static subjects, the lens locks focus quickly and confidently.
However, I’ve noticed that the autofocus can struggle slightly in very low light conditions or with low-contrast subjects. When shooting events or fast-moving subjects, the autofocus is competent but not as fast as Sony’s native lenses or the Sigma.
One advantage of the Tamron’s autofocus system is its quiet operation. When shooting video, the autofocus is virtually silent, making it suitable for recording audio without picking up lens noise.
Sigma 14-24mm Autofocus
The Sigma 14-24mm uses a hypersonic motor (HSM) for autofocus, which is generally faster and more powerful than the stepping motor in the Tamron. In my testing, the Sigma’s autofocus is noticeably faster and more confident, especially in low light situations.
When shooting events or moving subjects, the Sigma maintains focus better and tracks subjects more effectively. The autofocus is also very accurate, rarely missing focus even in challenging conditions.
The only downside of the Sigma’s autofocus system is that it’s slightly louder than the Tamron’s. While not noisy by any means, you can hear the lens focusing in quiet environments, which might be a consideration for videographers or photographers who need to remain discreet.
Real-World Performance: Practical Shooting Scenarios
Specifications and test charts are one thing, but how do these lenses perform in real-world shooting situations? Let’s find out.
Landscape Photography
Landscape photography is where wide-angle zooms truly shine, and both lenses have their strengths in this genre.
The Tamron 17-28mm is an excellent landscape lens, especially when weight and portability are concerns. During a recent hiking trip, I appreciated how light the lens was in my backpack, allowing me to carry it for miles without fatigue. The 17-28mm range covers most landscape needs, from expansive vistas at 17mm to slightly compressed perspectives at 28mm.
However, I did miss the extra width of the Sigma on several occasions. When I was in tight spaces or wanted to capture more dramatic foreground elements, the 17mm minimum focal length felt limiting. The ability to use standard filters is a huge advantage, though, as I regularly use ND and polarizing filters for my landscape work.
The Sigma 14-24mm is a landscape photographer’s dream, primarily because of its 14mm wide end. During a recent coastal photography trip, I was able to capture dramatic compositions that simply wouldn’t have been possible with the Tamron. The extra 3mm on the wide end makes a significant difference in the field of view, allowing for more creative compositions.
The corner-to-corner sharpness of the Sigma is also a major advantage for landscape photography. When I need to print large or examine fine details in my images, the Sigma’s optical performance gives me confidence that I’m capturing the maximum detail possible.
The main drawback of the Sigma for landscape work is the filter issue. As mentioned earlier, the inability to use standard filters is a significant inconvenience. I ended up investing in a dedicated filter holder system for the Sigma, which was expensive and adds bulk to an already large lens.
Architectural Photography
Architectural photography demands sharpness, minimal distortion, and often the ability to capture tight spaces. Both lenses perform well in this regard, but with some differences.
The Tamron 17-28mm is a competent architectural lens, especially for exterior shots where the 17mm wide end is usually sufficient. The lens renders straight lines well, and while there is some distortion at 17mm, it’s easily correctable in post-processing. For interior architectural work, however, I’ve found the 17mm minimum focal length to be limiting in tight spaces.
The Sigma 14-24mm excels in architectural photography, particularly for interiors. The 14mm wide end allows me to capture entire rooms in a single frame, which is often impossible with longer lenses. The minimal distortion and excellent corner sharpness ensure that architectural details are rendered accurately throughout the frame.
During a recent shoot of a historic building, I was able to capture both grand exterior shots and intimate interior details with the Sigma, something that would have been challenging with the Tamron. The ability to go ultra-wide made a significant difference in the impact of my final images.
Astrophotography
Astrophotography is one of the most demanding tests for wide-angle lenses, requiring excellent coma control, minimal vignetting, and good sharpness wide open.
The Tamron 17-28mm performs adequately for astrophotography but isn’t exceptional. At f/2.8, stars in the center of the frame are reasonably sharp, but coma (stretching of stars near the corners) is noticeable. Vignetting is also quite pronounced at f/2.8, which can be problematic for starry sky images. Stopping down to f/4 improves both coma and vignetting significantly, but this requires higher ISO or longer exposures, which can introduce noise.
The Sigma 14-24mm is outstanding for astrophotography, one of the best wide-angle lenses I’ve used for this purpose. Coma is extremely well-controlled, even wide open at f/2.8, with stars remaining point-like across most of the frame. While vignetting is more pronounced than the Tamron, it’s more uniform and easier to correct in post-processing.
During a recent Milky Way shoot, I was amazed at how well the Sigma performed. The ability to capture the entire Milky Way arc at 14mm with minimal coma and excellent sharpness was a game-changer for my astrophotography.
Event and Travel Photography
For event and travel photography, factors like size, weight, and versatility become as important as pure optical performance.
The Tamron 17-28mm shines in this category. Its compact size and light weight make it ideal for all-day shooting during events or while traveling. During a recent destination wedding, I carried the Tamron all day without fatigue, and its versatility allowed me to capture everything from wide venue shots to more intimate environmental portraits.
The autofocus, while not the fastest, is adequate for most event situations, and the weather sealing gave me confidence when shooting outdoors in changing conditions.
The Sigma 14-24mm is less ideal for event and travel photography due to its size and weight. During a recent city trip, I found myself leaving the Sigma in the hotel room more often than not, simply because it was too bulky to carry around all day. When I did use it, the image quality was outstanding, but the physical demands of carrying such a large lens were significant.
However, for specific event situations where an ultra-wide perspective is needed, the Sigma is unmatched. During a recent concert shoot, the 14mm wide end allowed me to capture the entire stage and crowd in a way that would have been impossible with the Tamron.
Also Read: B+W XS-Pro vs F-Pro
Value Proposition and Price Analysis
Price is always a consideration when choosing between lenses, so let’s examine the value proposition of each option.
Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD
The Tamron 17-28mm typically retails for around $699, making it one of the most affordable full-frame f/2.8 wide-angle zooms for Sony E-mount. When I consider the optical performance, build quality, and compact size, I believe this lens offers exceptional value for money.
For photographers on a budget or those who prioritize portability, the Tamron represents an excellent investment. It delivers 90% of the performance of more expensive lenses at a fraction of the cost and size.
Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN Art
The Sigma 14-24mm typically retails for around $1,399, roughly double the price of the Tamron. This places it in the premium lens category, competing with Sony’s own G Master lenses.
While the price is significantly higher, the Sigma offers superior optical performance, especially in terms of corner sharpness and aberration control. The wider focal range and premium build quality also contribute to its value proposition.
For professional photographers or serious enthusiasts who demand the best possible image quality, the Sigma is worth the investment. However, for casual shooters or those on a tighter budget, the price might be difficult to justify.
Who Should Buy Which Lens?
Based on my extensive testing, here’s my recommendation for who should consider each lens.
You Should Buy the Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 If:
- You prioritize portability and lightweight gear
- You’re on a tighter budget
- You primarily shoot landscapes and travel photography
- You need to use standard filters
- You want a versatile walk-around wide-angle lens
- You don’t often need focal lengths wider than 17mm
I’ve recommended the Tamron to several friends who are travel and landscape photographers, and they’ve all been impressed with its performance relative to its size and price. It’s the perfect lens for photographers who want high-quality images without the bulk and expense of larger alternatives.
You Should Buy the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 If:
- You need the widest possible focal length for your work
- You prioritize optical performance above all else
- You shoot a lot of architecture or astrophotography
- You’re a professional photographer who needs the best possible image quality
- You don’t mind carrying larger, heavier lenses
- You’re willing to invest in a dedicated filter system
I’ve recommended the Sigma to professional landscape and architectural photographers who demand the highest possible image quality. While it’s larger and more expensive, the optical performance and wider focal range make it the ideal choice for these specialized applications.
Final Verdict
After spending countless hours with both lenses in various shooting conditions, I can confidently say that both the Tamron 17-28mm and Sigma 14-24mm are excellent lenses that serve different purposes.
The Tamron 17-28mm is the perfect choice for photographers who want a compact, lightweight wide-angle zoom that delivers excellent image quality at an affordable price. It’s versatile enough for most wide-angle applications and won’t weigh you down during long shooting sessions.
The Sigma 14-24mm is the ultimate choice for photographers who demand the best possible optical performance and need the widest possible focal length. It’s larger, heavier, and more expensive, but the image quality and versatility justify the investment for serious photographers.
Ultimately, your choice should be based on your specific needs, shooting style, and budget. Both lenses will serve you well, but understanding their strengths and weaknesses will help you make the right choice for your photography.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which lens is better for landscape photography?
Both lenses are excellent for landscape photography, but they serve different needs. The Tamron 17-28mm is more compact and lighter, making it ideal for hiking and travel. The Sigma 14-24mm offers a wider focal range and better corner sharpness, which is beneficial for capturing dramatic landscapes. If you prioritize portability, the Tamron is the better choice. If you need the widest possible views and maximum sharpness, the Sigma is superior.
Can I use filters with these lenses?
The Tamron 17-28mm has a standard 67mm filter thread, allowing you to use regular circular polarizers, ND filters, and other creative filters without any special adapters. The Sigma 14-24mm, due to its large front element and bulbous design, cannot accept standard filters. Instead, it requires a dedicated filter holder system that attaches to the lens hood, which is an additional expense.
Which lens is better for astrophotography?
The Sigma 14-24mm is significantly better for astrophotography. It has excellent coma control, meaning stars remain point-like across most of the frame even at f/2.8. The Tamron 17-28mm shows more coma, especially in the corners, which can be problematic for starry sky images. If astrophotography is a priority for you, the Sigma is the clear winner.
How do these lenses compare to Sony’s own wide-angle zooms?
Sony offers several wide-angle zooms, including the FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM and the FE 12-24mm f/2.8 GM. The Sony G Master lenses are generally more expensive than both the Tamron and Sigma, but they offer excellent build quality and optical performance. The Tamron 17-28mm is more compact than the Sony 16-35mm GM but has a narrower focal range. The Sigma 14-24mm competes directly with the Sony 12-24mm GM, offering similar performance at a lower price point.
Which lens has better autofocus?
The Sigma 14-24mm has faster and more accurate autofocus than the Tamron 17-28mm, especially in low light situations. The Sigma’s hypersonic motor (HSM) is more powerful than the Tamron’s RXD (Rapid eXtra-silent stepping Drive), making it better for tracking moving subjects. However, the Tamron’s autofocus is virtually silent, making it slightly better for video applications where lens noise might be picked up by the microphone.
Also Read: 5Ds vs 5D Mark III
Pro Tips for Getting the Most Out of Your Wide-Angle Lens
Whether you choose the Tamron 17-28mm or Sigma 14-24mm, here are some tips I’ve learned over the years to help you get the most out of your wide-angle lens:
- Use a tripod for maximum sharpness: Both lenses benefit from being used on a tripod, especially at smaller apertures where diffraction can become an issue. A sturdy tripod will help you get the sharpest possible images.
- Stop down for optimal sharpness: While both lenses are sharp wide open, they perform best when stopped down to f/5.6-f/8. For landscape and architectural photography where depth of field is important, I usually shoot at f/8-f/11.
- Watch your edges: Wide-angle lenses exaggerate distortion at the edges of the frame. Be mindful of what’s at the edges of your composition, especially when photographing people or architecture.
- Use leading lines: Wide-angle lenses are perfect for creating depth in your images. Look for natural leading lines like roads, rivers, or fences that draw the viewer’s eye into the image.
- Get close to your foreground: When shooting landscapes with a wide-angle lens, get close to an interesting foreground element. This creates a sense of depth and scale in your images.
- Correct distortion in post-processing: Both lenses benefit from distortion correction in post-processing. Lightroom and Capture One have built-in profiles for both lenses that automatically correct distortion and vignetting.
- For Sigma users, invest in a good filter system: If you choose the Sigma 14-24mm, invest in a high-quality filter system designed specifically for this lens. While expensive, it will significantly expand your creative possibilities.
- For astrophotography, focus manually: When shooting the night sky, switch to manual focus and use live view magnification to ensure perfect focus on the stars.
Save This Article for Later
Choosing between these two excellent wide-angle lenses is an important decision, and you might want to refer back to this comparison as you consider your options. I recommend bookmarking this article so you can easily find it when you’re ready to make your purchase. Camera gear is constantly evolving, and I’ll be updating this article as new information becomes available, so check back for the latest insights on these fantastic lenses.
Happy shooting, and I hope this comparison helps you choose the perfect wide-angle lens for your photography journey!