Welcome to the forum!
As an adjunct to the Tangents blog, the intention with this forum is to answer any questions, and allow a diverse discussion of topics related photography. With that, see it as an open invitation to just climb in and start threads and to respond to any threads.
As an adjunct to the Tangents blog, the intention with this forum is to answer any questions, and allow a diverse discussion of topics related photography. With that, see it as an open invitation to just climb in and start threads and to respond to any threads.
Any good alternative to Nikkor 24-70 2.8
I am not a pro, but I always wanted to have 24-70 2.8 lens, but it is damn expensive and not sure if worth getting for my d90. Is there any good alternative to it, or it is just to good?
I found this:
http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-28-75mm-Aspherical-Digital-Cameras/dp/B001955P8W/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1312927134&sr=1-3
but not sure what is it worth?
thx
I found this:
http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-28-75mm-Aspherical-Digital-Cameras/dp/B001955P8W/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1312927134&sr=1-3
but not sure what is it worth?
thx
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Discussions2,002
- home434
- news & discussions193
- technique & style & stuff461
- general photography172
- wedding photography141
- portraits & people101
- the gear307
- Canon86
- Nikon116
- other systems40
- flash & lighting537
- flash & lighting121
- post-production199
- post-processing125
- computer hardware & software44
- business64
- business & marketing49
In this Discussion
All rights reserved Neil van Niekerk © 2006 - 2019
Comments
http://www.tamron-usa.com/lenses/prod/1750_diII_a016.asp
because I have d90, so the 17-50 lens becomes 25-75
The Tamron is pretty much the same in contrast and resolution in the center of the frame at all apertures and focal lengths. Some focal lengths the Nikon wins ever so slightly, at other focal lengths the tables are turned. The Nikon is better in the corners of the frame from F2.8-F5.6. That said, the Tamron performs very well in the corners at F4, the 24-70mm is excellent in the corners at that aperture. On DX the differences will evaporate at around F4.
The Tamron lens comes in several different AF configurations. The Non BIM version I use will focus much faster than the first series of BIM lens. Not sure about the current BIM lens. The Nikon however is one of the fastest focusing lenses available, right up there with the 70-200VR.
For the money and weight the Nikon simply can't touch the Tamron. As a small but very high quality travel lens the Tamron is excellent. If I were being paid to shoot a wedding, I would not look past the Nikon 24-70mm. That lens plus a 70-200mm and you have most of your shots covered with premium glass.
For you, the Tamron is the definite winner if the focal length range suits you.
Cheers
William Cowan
You did not mention anything in regards to 17-50 Tamron? Is this lens any good?
Also, i found reviews of the 28-75 and they say that tamron has some issues with focusing and it depends on the hardware you get. If you are lucky then it is ok, if not then you have a problem and must either replace or repair?
And yes, the nikkor is a beauty , for a hobby shooter, it is a lot of money.
I've owned both the BIM and non BIM 28-75s and both of them had very accurate and reliable focus. Neither of them required any focus fine tune. The early BIM version was too slow to focus track a slow walking person. I've only used these lenses on a D700.
Cheers
William Cowan
price-wise the Nikon is about 5x more expensive than the Tamron over here...
Also consider a used copy of The Beast .... the Nikon 28-70mm f2.8 AF-S
btw. what about this one? Sigma AF 24-70mm 2.8 EX DG Macro sounds good too because of the added macro bonus :-)
any thoughts on this one?
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Camera-Lens-Ratings
According to the above tests, the Nikon 24-70mm is the best zoom lens available.
The Nikon 24-70mm (DxOMark Score = 28), is much better than the Tamron 28-75mm (DxO Mark Score =18).
Reviews of the Tamron 17-50mm:
http://bythom.com/1750lens.htm
http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/290-tamron-af-17-50mm-f28-sp-xr-di-ii-ld-aspherical-if-nikon-test-report--review?start=2
Sorry tamron, nikon is just sharper and produced nicer colors.
At least it was my impression. I sent the tamron back.
I better save that 500 and add it to my future nikon lens.
So I got the 11-16, tested it out beforehand (generally, the first shots you take with a new lens should NOT be on the job) and all seemed fine. However, at some point during the winery gig only a couple of days later, the lens stopped being able to acquire sharp focus. This, unfortunately, wasn't noticeable in the camera's LCD but it was really obvious in post.
When I re-examined the lens I found that it couldn't make a sharp frame in either auto or manual focusing mode -- something inside the lens apparently shifted making it unusable. I sent it back to B&H and got the Nikon 12-24 as a replacement. It's worked well from day one and continues to be a stellar performer. I had to go back to the winery and reshoot some frames but it could have been worse -- at least no models were involved in the ruined shots.
If I'd just gotten the Nikon to begin with...
I went to an AP Model shoot last year sponsored by Sigma, and they had truckloads of lenses to try out. As I asked around, the folks who borrowed them for the day had differing opinions, but they were mostly, "Meh...it's okay. I'm going back to my other glass..."
Bottom line: you can't go wrong with Nikon glass...unless you drop a 24-70 on your foot.
I had a Tamron once, and the price savings is attractive. But unless it's a specialized range that no one else offers (there are some wide angle ones I can think of), I really don't think I would do it again.
But this is tech talk many are not even interested in. See and look for contender results in action.
The Sigma 24~70mm f/2.8 for Nikon here:
http://latinimage.blogspot.com/2011/08/summer-carnevale-at-castle-mcculloch.html
The link you provided, are images at web-resolution ... hardly a way to discern the performance of the lenses.
One other thing I hadn't considered was focusing. True AFS Nikon lenses (not some of the kit lenses that are labeled AFS) have easy focus override. Focusing on some of the Tamron models I used was also not as quiet, fast or smooth as the similar Nikon lens. This may be something to consider as well.
Neil could you tell me a little more about the less than stellar Canon 24-70 performance you mention earlier?
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM with Canon EOS 5D Mark II
DxO Mark Ranking = No.163 on list
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED with Nikon D3s
DxO Mark Ranking = No. 33 on list
As noted earlier, the Nikon 24-70mm lens is the best zoom lens on the market.
The skill & artistic ability of person behind the camera and lens will pobably make a bigger difference in the images than the difference in ranking.
+++++++
I made my own conclution regarding Tamron vs Sigma lenses (Tamron 17-50mm vs Sigma 17-50mm) on DX camera (Equal to 24-70mm on full frame:
It is my opinion that the optical quality of the Tamron is marginally better, but the Tamron lens has several issues like under exposure problems. With 90mm Tamron lens I get battery level low indication with full battery, etc. Problems with the Tamron lenses are unrelated to the optical quality of the lens.
He used a Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lens.
Admittedly, *I* didn't use the lens, but the images I got back from this lens (on a D700) were subpar.
ALL images shot at f2.8 were unusably soft.
This is not a lens I would recommend. Money spent on it is money wasted that should've gone towards a professional lens.
Also, it has some of the ugliest bokeh I have *ever* seen in a lens, including the Canon 50mm f1.4 and Nikon 50mm f1.4D lenses.
It's also a lens that appears to go out of calibration easily.
And I also *know* that if I have a second-shooter using this lens, ALL images shot at 24mm, focused on infinity, will be unusable.
I don't like the lens.