Opinions on Tamron Lens
09-04-2009, 06:35 AM
#21
I agree. I have been looking into the lens myself, and as with alot of things it can be hit or miss. As long as they are easy to deal with and dont try and screw you around, There shouldnt be to much of a problem.
09-04-2009, 10:46 AM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
+1 on the Tamron 28-75 f.2.8 is great! I agree that Sigma's build seems better than Tamron but usually the Tamron are sharper.
With any lens you purchase be sure to do a full test and don't be afraid to send it back if you find any problems wuth quality or sharpness.
With any lens you purchase be sure to do a full test and don't be afraid to send it back if you find any problems wuth quality or sharpness.
09-05-2009, 11:33 PM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a Tamron 28-75 F2.8, used it on my old rebel 300d, a 30d, 40d and now my 5D mark2 and still love that lens. It's very sharp, focuses well in semi-low light and better, but it likes to hunt in low light. My buddy has a 17-50 F2.8 (everyone seems to love this lens for a crop body setup) and he loves it. It's a great bargain compared to a 17-55 F2.8 IS canon lens.
Yes, they feel a little plasticy, and they have noisy focusing, but I will not be replacing my 28-75 for anything. It has served me very well, is incredibly sharp and it's a bargain. BTW, 28-75 is a proper walk around lens on a full framer. I will be happy owning this lens for many years.
I forgot to respond to the 18-270 (whatever it is) lens critique. i used it on my 5d (not suppose to), and the level of versatility is truly amazing. however, most will report, including me, that it produces pretty soft photos. Now if you are more concerned with convenience and a light weight option (very light) and not too concerned with absolute sharpness and IQ, this lens is for you. For a very casual shooter, I can see how a lens like this would be ideal.
Yes, they feel a little plasticy, and they have noisy focusing, but I will not be replacing my 28-75 for anything. It has served me very well, is incredibly sharp and it's a bargain. BTW, 28-75 is a proper walk around lens on a full framer. I will be happy owning this lens for many years.
I forgot to respond to the 18-270 (whatever it is) lens critique. i used it on my 5d (not suppose to), and the level of versatility is truly amazing. however, most will report, including me, that it produces pretty soft photos. Now if you are more concerned with convenience and a light weight option (very light) and not too concerned with absolute sharpness and IQ, this lens is for you. For a very casual shooter, I can see how a lens like this would be ideal.
09-09-2009, 03:15 AM
#25
Former Moderator
The optics on the Tamron 17-50 and 28-75 are superior to Canon's L series. The build quality is so so, but for half the price, it's fine. The images I get from my 17-50 still floor me.
09-12-2009, 02:28 PM
#26
Thread Starter
Well I bought the Tamron 18-270 VR today. We will see how well I like over the next week!
09-12-2009, 04:30 PM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Greater Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 837
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I have a Tamron 70-300mm and although its build quality is nice, I have a hard time getting tack sharp images - high quality tripod, mirror delay, mirror lock, timed release, no matter what. In contrast, I can get great images from pretty much any Nikon.
09-23-2009, 08:55 AM
#29
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Los Angeles, Buena Park
Posts: 5,660
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Originally Posted by Ubetit,Sep 6 2009, 11:46 AM
I think my tamron 17-50 is sharper than my Canon 24-70L. it's also half the weight.
i sold my tamron 17-50 replaced it with the Canon L 17-40 thinking that i might get a better quality but damn it looks like they are just almost as good....
Half the price cant go wrong with it.... i would probably get their tamron 28-70
09-23-2009, 10:34 AM
#30
Registered User
^ They are on par image quality wise, where the canon shines is in build quality. Being a pro that uses my lenses in many trying situations the build quality is a big deal when i consider what lenses to buy. The tamron's are not built very well IMHO. I have owned them both. Just some food for thought if anyone is considering any of the lenses discussed.