Got the Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 *pics*

rookieshooterrookieshooter Registered Users Posts: 539 Major grins
edited August 6, 2009 in Cameras
After renting the Nikkor ED 24-70mm lens for a photo workshop last week, I decided I needed to have a standard range zoom.

The Nikkor costs $1,900, the Tamron -- $400. I was worried it would be a piece of garbage but I snapped some pics today at work and around the house and am so far very impressed with the sharpness and colors. There's a teeny bit of vignetting at 28mm but that is due to the full frame sensor I am told.

Examples:

604611554_DqFcF-XL.jpg

604610864_vYhFW-XL.jpg

[604648555_MnYDr-XL.jpg

604610975_vS8z4-XL.jpg

604610700_u9W4d-XL.jpg

604737515_8p23N-XL.jpg

What do you think? Not bad for the money!
«1

Comments

  • rainbowrainbow Registered Users Posts: 2,765 Major grins
    edited July 28, 2009
    Looks like this lens in your hands will take many fine photos!
  • Chrissiebeez_NLChrissiebeez_NL Registered Users Posts: 1,295 Major grins
    edited July 29, 2009
    its a great lens (just focusses somewhat slowly) and i agree your shots look nice! thumb.gif congrats on the buy!
    Visit my website at christopherroos.smugmug.com
  • Scott_QuierScott_Quier Registered Users Posts: 6,524 Major grins
    edited July 29, 2009
    clap.gif - Congrats on the lens. I've had this lens for 3 or 4 years. It's a keeper. Love it - it fits a nice niche in my kit.
    Scott
    My Photos
    Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
    Equipment List - Check my profile
  • rookieshooterrookieshooter Registered Users Posts: 539 Major grins
    edited July 29, 2009
    Chrissiebeez_NL wrote:
    its a great lens (just focusses somewhat slowly) and i agree your shots look nice! thumb.gif congrats on the buy!

    Yes, the focusing is a bit slow. That is definitely true.
  • Cygnus StudiosCygnus Studios Registered Users Posts: 2,294 Major grins
    edited July 29, 2009
    I also own this lens and love it. It is a great all around lens, and really nice for headshots.
    Steve

    Website
  • KA0TVOKA0TVO Registered Users Posts: 164 Major grins
    edited July 29, 2009
    On a full frame this lens performs very well.
    Bob
  • lilmommalilmomma Registered Users Posts: 1,060 Major grins
    edited July 29, 2009
    I was thinking about getting this lens...think I might take the plunge after seeing some pics with it.


    KA0TVO wrote:
    On a full frame this lens performs very well.

    Hey KA0TVO..you live like 5 minutes from me! im in LSL.
  • paddler4paddler4 Registered Users Posts: 976 Major grins
    edited July 29, 2009
    I've had one for about a year and have been very pleased as well--bought it because the corresponding Canon L lens was about 3x the price. Enjoy.
    http://dkoretz.smugmug.com/
  • JohnnyNapalmJohnnyNapalm Registered Users Posts: 134 Major grins
    edited July 29, 2009
    It's a great lens, of course, and looks like you will take great shots with it. Grats.
    http://www.scottryanphotography.com
  • Manfr3dManfr3d Registered Users Posts: 2,008 Major grins
    edited July 30, 2009
    Nice colors and out of focus blur! I had the Tamron on a crop camera and never considered it for full frame. How is sharpness at f2.8 and f4?
    “To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
    ― Edward Weston
  • Art ScottArt Scott Registered Users Posts: 8,959 Major grins
    edited July 30, 2009
    I have had both the 28-70 and the 24-70 f2.8, both Siggy's tho, and found them to be fantastic as far as focusing and sharpness, but not wide enuff for my likes on a crop body..........I am still looking to get a 17-70.....just wish it were a constant aperture.......
    "Genuine Fractals was, is and will always be the best solution for enlarging digital photos." ....Vincent Versace ... ... COPYRIGHT YOUR WORK ONLINE ... ... My Website

  • JohnnyNapalmJohnnyNapalm Registered Users Posts: 134 Major grins
    edited July 30, 2009
    Manfr3d wrote:
    Nice colors and out of focus blur! I had the Tamron on a crop camera and never considered it for full frame. How is sharpness at f2.8 and f4?
    Here's a 2.8 at 28mm from mine:
    513187645_ponmR-XL.jpg
    http://www.scottryanphotography.com
  • amg2833amg2833 Registered Users Posts: 155 Major grins
    edited July 30, 2009
    I have this lenses "brother" (Tamron 17-50 2.8), but I hear the optics are virtually the same.

    For the price, these lenses cannot be beat!
    ANTHONY :thumb
    [AMG]photos

    [Yashica Lynx 14E | Canon 30D | Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 | 540ez | Cactus V4s]


  • Manfr3dManfr3d Registered Users Posts: 2,008 Major grins
    edited July 31, 2009
    JohnnyNapalm wrote:
    Here's a 2.8 at 28mm from mine:

    Thanks. Altough everything looks sharp at web size :) I think I will try the lens soon on my 5D II to see what it's all about. The review on Photozone doesn't rate it very good. On the other hand I don't see anything in the sample images I don't like. It's such an affordable lens. Link: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/418-tamron_2875_28_5d?start=2
    “To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
    ― Edward Weston
  • JohnnyNapalmJohnnyNapalm Registered Users Posts: 134 Major grins
    edited July 31, 2009
    Manfr3d wrote:
    Thanks. Altough everything looks sharp at web size :) I think I will try the lens soon on my 5D II to see what it's all about. The review on Photozone doesn't rate it very good. On the other hand I don't see anything in the sample images I don't like. It's such an affordable lens. Link: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/418-tamron_2875_28_5d?start=2
    Don't let one review stand in your way. User satisfaction around the forums is almost 100% with this bad boy.
    http://www.scottryanphotography.com
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,132 moderator
    edited July 31, 2009
    Manfr3d wrote:
    Thanks. Altough everything looks sharp at web size :) I think I will try the lens soon on my 5D II to see what it's all about. The review on Photozone doesn't rate it very good. On the other hand I don't see anything in the sample images I don't like. It's such an affordable lens. Link: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/418-tamron_2875_28_5d?start=2

    Here are some independent images that show some of the lens problems on FF (the Canon 5D in this case):

    http://www.pbase.com/joemama/tamron_2875__28

    Note the combination of obvious vignetting in the corners and extremely soft corners with soft edges.

    While there are many circumstances where this really would be acceptable, there are also circumstances where it is not desirable. This would not be a very suitable landscapes lens for full frame cameras, unless you need or desire the effects above.

    On crop cameras these effects are much less of a problem, and that's where I think you see the higher level of satisfaction.

    To be clear, the middle 80% of the lens is quite good at any aperture and the center shows very good sharpness. It is not a horrible lens, just not my recommendation for FF cameras.

    For Canon FF I am very happy with the EF 28-80mm, f2.8-f4L USM. While it has it's own set of problems, they are much less optically than the Tamron above and it is proving to be a very good lens for me on all Canon camera bodies. The biggest problem is that Canon will no longer repair this lens, although some independent shops may still repair it. The used purchase price tends to be on the more reasonable side because of the age of the lens.

    The Canon 28-70mm, f2.8L USM is even better and apparently still supported by Canon repairs, although it costs more to purchase used.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • rookieshooterrookieshooter Registered Users Posts: 539 Major grins
    edited July 31, 2009
    The focusing is very slow too, so I've found it basically impossible to photograph a moving subject like my cat. As soon as it focuses on her face and I'm ready she moves, repeat ad nauseum.
  • JohnnyNapalmJohnnyNapalm Registered Users Posts: 134 Major grins
    edited July 31, 2009
    ziggy53 wrote:
    This would not be a very suitable landscapes lens for full frame cameras, unless you need or desire the effects above.
    28mm for a landscape lens? I'm sure people aren't buying the Tamron with that in mind...
    http://www.scottryanphotography.com
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,132 moderator
    edited July 31, 2009
    JohnnyNapalm wrote:
    28mm for a landscape lens? I'm sure people aren't buying the Tamron with that in mind...

    Not for the crop cameras as it isn't very wide, but for a FF camera the wide end can be useful for landscapes although not vista landscapes so much. Actually, any focal length can be used for landscapes and I have used up to 500mm lenses for landscape photography. It just depends upon the subject and angle of view you desire. Longer focal lengths are often used to compress the apparent distance between foreground and background using compressed perspective technique, for instance.

    Sorry to hijack your thread and I am not raining on your Tamron for crop cameras, it really is a very good choice for a slightly longer standard zoom on crop cameras. At one time it was "extremely" popular and it is still highly sought.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • rookieshooterrookieshooter Registered Users Posts: 539 Major grins
    edited August 1, 2009
    And the honeymoon is over...

    It just focuses too slow for my tastes. If your subject is moving AT ALL it will not work, as it takes about 2-3 seconds to focus, which seems like a lifetime. And by the time you almost get it focused, the subject moves again. Will keep it handy for landscape/flowers and other things but am going to rent the Sigma 24-70mm and see how that does. Reviews say focus is fast and silent, which is exactly what I'm looking for. It's double the cost of the Tamron but still $1,000 less than the Nikkor.
  • JohnnyNapalmJohnnyNapalm Registered Users Posts: 134 Major grins
    edited August 1, 2009
    rookieshooter wrote:
    And the honeymoon is over...

    It just focuses too slow for my tastes. If your subject is moving AT ALL it will not work, as it takes about 2-3 seconds to focus, which seems like a lifetime. And by the time you almost get it focused, the subject moves again.
    I guess that's why I had no trouble using it at a wedding reception in low light, where people were moving constantly? eek7.gif

    You DO have AI Servo on for fast moving targets, right?
    http://www.scottryanphotography.com
  • rookieshooterrookieshooter Registered Users Posts: 539 Major grins
    edited August 1, 2009
    JohnnyNapalm wrote:
    I guess that's why I had no trouble using it at a wedding reception in low light, where people were moving constantly? eek7.gif

    You DO have AI Servo on for fast moving targets, right?

    heh, yes I had it on continuous focus (nikon). It is very slow. I'm not doubting your claims but in my experience it is just too slow. Maybe I have a bad copy?
  • Scott_QuierScott_Quier Registered Users Posts: 6,524 Major grins
    edited August 2, 2009
    rookieshooter wrote:
    heh, yes I had it on continuous focus (nikon). It is very slow. I'm not doubting your claims but in my experience it is just too slow. Maybe I have a bad copy?
    To quote one of my favorite TV characters, "There's something hinky with that!" I just mounted my Tammy on my Canon 50D and did some focus testing.

    Outside with good light, focus was almost as fast as any one of my Canon "L" lenses. With AI-Server (constant AF) engaged, focus followed quite nicely. I don't have any rug-rats to us as test subjects, so I just moved the lens from close stuff to objects further away. One test was to focus at the side of my house (from 10' away) and re-orient the camera to view things 50' to 100' away. No issues. All focus times where sub 1 second.

    Inside with light levels to mimic those found at many receptions - took just slightly longer but didn't do much (if any) hunting.
    Scott
    My Photos
    Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
    Equipment List - Check my profile
  • JohnnyNapalmJohnnyNapalm Registered Users Posts: 134 Major grins
    edited August 2, 2009
    rookieshooter wrote:
    (nikon)
    Guys, I just found the problem.
    http://www.scottryanphotography.com
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,132 moderator
    edited August 2, 2009
    JohnnyNapalm wrote:
    Guys, I just found the problem.

    Care to share?
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • Chrissiebeez_NLChrissiebeez_NL Registered Users Posts: 1,295 Major grins
    edited August 2, 2009
    JohnnyNapalm wrote:
    Guys, I just found the problem.

    boy you just started a flamewar rolleyes1.gif
    Visit my website at christopherroos.smugmug.com
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,132 moderator
    edited August 2, 2009
    ziggy53 wrote:
    Care to share?

    Never mind. I missed the joke.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • Tim KamppinenTim Kamppinen Registered Users Posts: 816 Major grins
    edited August 2, 2009
    Hmm... I have one that I use with my D90... I shot a wedding reception in a dark cave of a venue, two weeks ago, and didn't have any problems focusing on people who were dancing and moving quickly. I did have an SB900 on top with the focus assist on, however. Have you tried it with a Nikon speedlight mounted, or do you at least have the built-in AF assist illuminator on? Remember, even if you are shooting natural light you can use just the AF-Ill on an SB without the flash firing.
    http://www.timkphotography.com
    http://blog.timkphotography.com
  • PamaniPamani Registered Users Posts: 55 Big grins
    edited August 4, 2009
    ive been thinking of getting this Tamron lens, thanks for posting up.
  • rookieshooterrookieshooter Registered Users Posts: 539 Major grins
    edited August 5, 2009
    My buddy has the exact same lens, on a Canon 30D. I tried it out and it focuses much quicker. Either I got a bad copy or the Canon is just better, not really sure.

    I'm sending this lens back to Amazon for a refund -- which is the reason for this post. If you haven't used a lens before always make sure they have a robust return policy :)
Sign In or Register to comment.