Used Tamron 28-75...Yay or Nay?

S-ManS-Man Registered Users Posts: 151 Major grins
edited March 3, 2008 in Accessories
Currently I have an XTi with the Kit lens and a 50 1.8. I want a better lens than the kit, and have been looking at the Tamron 17-50. However, I came across a used 28-75 for around $280, and am kind of interested. What do you guys think of this lens, and the deal?
I wonder if I'll miss the 17mm wide on the kit lens?
I love the 50 1.8, but sometimes want a tad more zoom.
Suggestions please?
Thanks in advance!
Sam

Comments

  • 3rdPlanetPhotography3rdPlanetPhotography Banned Posts: 920 Major grins
    edited February 2, 2008
    I have one that I use as my main lens. I LOVE IT. I shot this with the lens about 2 days ago.

    Hope that helps.

    249468730-L.jpg
    S-Man wrote:
    Currently I have an XTi with the Kit lens and a 50 1.8. I want a better lens than the kit, and have been looking at the Tamron 17-50. However, I came across a used 28-75 for around $280, and am kind of interested. What do you guys think of this lens, and the deal?
    I wonder if I'll miss the 17mm wide on the kit lens?
    I love the 50 1.8, but sometimes want a tad more zoom.
    Suggestions please?
    Thanks in advance!
  • MartynMartyn Registered Users Posts: 112 Major grins
    edited February 2, 2008
    I have the 28-75 for my 40D and it is a very good lens. Unfortunately I find that, for me, it is not quiet wide enough to use as a general walk-about and will replace it with the 17-50 in the next couple of days.
  • Manfr3dManfr3d Registered Users Posts: 2,008 Major grins
    edited February 2, 2008
    It's a great lens and I like the long range it has.
    I use it regulary for concerts and performance photography.
    thumb.gif
    “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
  • James SJames S Registered Users Posts: 439 Major grins
    edited February 2, 2008
    That 28-75 is my lens that stays on the camera. ONe of my sharpest lenses. I love it and would not sell it for anything. The fact that they are hard to find used should tell you something.
    My Website


  • Scott_QuierScott_Quier Registered Users Posts: 6,524 Major grins
    edited February 2, 2008
    I have the 28-75 (have had for a couple of years now) and while I have other lens that I usually use more, this is one lens that I'm not ever going to part with. It's just too useful and the optics are fantastic, especially for the price I paid for it - huge bang for the buck!
    Scott
    My Photos
    Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
    Equipment List - Check my profile
  • S-ManS-Man Registered Users Posts: 151 Major grins
    edited February 2, 2008
    How's that price sound? $280? Is that good or about right? I've seen them sold for anywhere from $200 to $320.
    Thanks for the input guys!
    Sam
  • Eric&SusanEric&Susan Registered Users Posts: 1,280 Major grins
    edited February 2, 2008
    That price seems about average for a used copy.

    I loved my Tamron when I had it. Then I bought the Canon 24-105 and got rid of the Tamron. Being an amatuer I couldn't justify keeping two lens' so close in focal range.

    Eric
    "My dad taught me everything I know, unfortunately he didn't teach me everything he knows" Dale Earnhardt Jr

    It's better to be hated for who you are than to be loved for who you're not.

    http://photosbyeric.smugmug.com
  • sesshinsesshin Registered Users Posts: 16 Big grins
    edited February 3, 2008
    I bought a used 17-50 and while its nice I find I wish I had the 24-75 for the longer end. I use it mainly for walking around and shapshots but rarely use the 17 and always max out the 50. So if you want more reach go longer but for landscapes and the like you might want to consider the 17-50. OR get the 28-75 and then a dedicated wide angle if you feel you need to cover those focal lengths (this is what I plan to do).
  • David_S85David_S85 Administrators Posts: 13,245 moderator
    edited February 3, 2008
    Yay.
    I'll say this.... you won't find a better quality lens even at their price new. $280 used seems about right if it's a good copy. The 28-75 is tack sharp (beyond f/4.5), contrasty, and matched with it's hood, controls flare very well. The lock against lens wandering is a nice addition. It isn't heavy and the size should work well for a small bodied camera.

    28mm on a cropped camera like yours might not be wide enough for some shots, but I don't think you can beat it for a decent walk around lens.

    The Tammy stays on my 20D 85% of the time.
    My Smugmug
    "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
  • Chrissiebeez_NLChrissiebeez_NL Registered Users Posts: 1,295 Major grins
    edited February 3, 2008
    if you dont mind the wide end, i would say YAY! :D
    Visit my website at christopherroos.smugmug.com
  • jeffreaux2jeffreaux2 Registered Users Posts: 4,762 Major grins
    edited February 3, 2008
    Consiser this,

    I paid $309 for mine a year ago during rebate promotion time. If at all possible, be sure to get the original sales reciept and warranty card. Tamron carries a 6 year warranty on that lens, but you will need those items if you have to get it serviced.

    As for the lens, I built my budding portrait business on the back of that lens. There are times it isn't wide enough, but I have always managed with it. It is excellent for portrait work and group shots. Many also use it for landscape work. It is not a "true" macro lens, but is a close focuser and can be used for that type of work in a pinch.

    I sent mine away two weeks ago for a calibration check. I found it to be soft in certain situations. I have wanted to send it for at least 6 months now, but always had a shoot or event scheduled that I would need it for. So even though I noticed some softness, I was able to work around those issues to do what I needed to do as it was plenty sharp for portraits.

    I recently purchased a 17-55 F2.8IS, but for now plan to keep the Tamron.

    I also use a crop body.
    Thanks,
    Jeff
    -Need help with Dgrin?; Wedding Photography Resources
    -My Website - Blog - Tips for Senior Portraiture
  • eyusufeyusuf Registered Users Posts: 236 Major grins
    edited February 3, 2008
    David_S85 wrote:
    The 28-75 is tack sharp (beyond f/4.5), contrasty, and matched with it's hood, controls flare very well. The lock against lens wandering is a nice addition. It isn't heavy and the size should work well for a small bodied camera.

    are you sure you're getting a good copy?
    mine is sharp even at 2.8..:) easily surpasses the more expensive canon 24-70 wide open.
  • S-ManS-Man Registered Users Posts: 151 Major grins
    edited February 5, 2008
    So is there a major difference between the XR DI version and the XR DI LD IF version? I noticed the latter was rated slightly higher on FM review forums.
    Sam
  • eyusufeyusuf Registered Users Posts: 236 Major grins
    edited February 5, 2008
    two test shots:

    28mm f/2.8
    http://eyusuf.smugmug.com/photos/237121735-O.jpg

    75mm f/2.8
    http://eyusuf.smugmug.com/photos/237121745-O.jpg

    i think there is only one 28-75
  • TaDaTaDa Registered Users Posts: 169 Major grins
    edited March 1, 2008
    Did you end up getting it? I got my Tammy 28-75 a week ago while saving for the 17-55, and must say that I'm absolutely floored by how good the optics are. It's just an absolutely amazing piece of glass for the price. (and mine is also nice and sharp wide open, but at F/4 and up, just amazing)
    My Kit
    Canon 5DII, Canon 7D
    Canon Canon 24-70 f/2.8L, Canon 35 f/1.4L, Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, Canon 85 f/1.2L II, Canon 500mm f/4 IS, Zeiss 21mm ZE
    Speedlite 580ex II, Canon 430ex
  • S-ManS-Man Registered Users Posts: 151 Major grins
    edited March 1, 2008
    Yes, actually I've had it now for a little while. I think it was a very good choice...I love the range it offers. I haven't found a situation yet where I need a wider view, but I haven't done many indoor shots yet. I also haven't really pixel-peeped to see how sharp it is wide open, but it looks very sharp so far. I'd love to get the 17-50, but I'm going to have to save up for something like that.
    Sam
  • rpcrowerpcrowe Registered Users Posts: 733 Major grins
    edited March 2, 2008
    Keep the kit along with the Tammy...
    You will not realize very much from the sale of the Kit Lens so, why not just keep it and use it as your wide-angle lens. I shot with a 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 Canon IS lens for a long time and I could make do with that lens for most shots. However, there were times when I needed a wider lens. You have a wider lens in the Kit.

    However, if you look back at your imagery and determine that a significant percentage of those images was shot using focal lengths shorter than 28mm, the 28-75mm Tammy might not be a good choice for you.
  • S-ManS-Man Registered Users Posts: 151 Major grins
    edited March 3, 2008
    rpcrowe wrote:
    You will not realize very much from the sale of the Kit Lens so, why not just keep it and use it as your wide-angle lens...

    Well, I already sold my kit lens, and got more than I should have for it so I'm happy. I needed help paying off the CC bills for the camera and Tamron. I was shooting a family of 4 today, and missed my 18mm wide angle...:(:
    Hopefully soon I'll be able to afford either the 17-55 IS or Tamron 17-50...We'll see. I really want that IS Canon...Either that or a 10-22ne_nau.gif
    Sam
Sign In or Register to comment.