5 replies to this topic

[funphotog]

Hello,

 

Looking for any advice on the Tamron 28-75.  I cannot afford $1900 for the Nikon, so I'm thinking of getting the Tamron. I already have the Tamron 17-55 and love it, used it all through school for photojournalism classes.  I use the Tamron 70-200 for my portraiture business. I'm hoping the 28-75 will make me just as happy.  

 

I would love to just use my 17-55, but when I mount it on my D700, looking through the eyepiece I see all kinds of black around the edges like the lens is not made for full frame.  Although Tamron states on their website that it should work on a crop or full frame camera.

 

Any advise on any of this?

[Merco_61]

The 17-50 works on FX, but should be used in DX mode. You can turn the autoswitching off if you, for example, want to crop to another aspect ratio and maximize your usable area.

The 28-75 is surprisingly good, I have found that I use it much more than I thought I would. It is much less intimidating for your subjects as well as being much more compact and lighter. The microcontrast is not brilliant, especially not compared to the 24-70 Nikkor but that isn't to be expected...

There is a third alternative that draws better than the 28-75 but is not as expensive as the Nikkor. That is the Tamron 24-70. It has one fault compared to the 28-75, and that is the magnification at near limit. As it is internal focusing, it shrinks the focal length when you focus close which gives a max magnification of 1:5 compared to the 1:3.9 of the 28-75.

[akanarya]

I used 28-75 on crop sensor, pentax K5.

It was wonderfull, It was the one that I regret to sell.

It isnt so popular on ff, I wonder also why,

may be it hasnt vr or not crisp as on apsc, I dont know.

[Merco_61]

I used 28-75 on crop sensor, pentax K5.

It was wonderfull, It was the one that I regret to sell.

It isnt so popular on ff, I wonder also why,

may be it hasnt vr or not crisp as on apsc, I dont know.

There is some sharpness and light falloff in the corners on FX, but one can work around these limitations, even with the low resolution D700. On the D800 the region between sharp and unsharp looks a bit strange because of the less than stellar microcontrast. It is very good for it's price as it has other advantages...

[dcbear78]

As stated look at the Tamron 24-70mm f2.8. It gets very favourable reviews. In fact many recommend it over the Nikon/Canon versions. It also is the only one with VR (or VC in Tamron speak). Only downside is a little bigger and heavier.

I'm pretty impressed with mine. In fact I like the ergonomics better as the focus and zoom rings are the opposite to the Nikon version and means when holding it is easier not to accidentally bump the focus ring.

[TBonz]

Both of the 24-70 lenses are very nice...I've shot with both...while I prefer the Nikon, the Tamron will do nicely...haven't tried their 28-85 so can't speak to that one...if you don't need the 2.8, the Nikon 24-120 f4 is also a great walk around lens...not small, but a great range...