Tamron SP AF28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di

Newman · 8th September 2003

Hi, I would like some feedback from anyone using the above lens. I heard that it's pretty good. If you can post some shots shot with this lens, I'd much appreciate it. Thanks in advance.

Snowcrash · 9th September 2003

Here is a discussion on the lens you mentioned

Newman · 9th September 2003

Thanks for link Snowcrash but I had already checked on all the discussions for this lens. Just wanted to get more feedback if possible.

YSLee · 9th September 2003

I've had a very quick run through it, seems decent enough at f/2.8, with some slight corner softness (I believe it'll work great on DSLRs with APS sized sensors).

finkster · 9th September 2003

Did a quick test of the Tokina 287 28-70 F2.8 (the one CP was promoting), the Sigma 24-70 F2.8 DG DF and the Tamron 28-75 XR Di.

Summary of the results were that the Tokina's image at 2.8 is unusable. Extremely soft. At F8 it is much better, almost as good as the Tamron at the same aperture.

Tamron at 2.8 is slightly soft, but still acceptable. Sigma falls somewhere between the two in terms of sharpness and color.

I would rank these lenses as such:
1st : Tamron
Good : Best image quality, lightweight, mid-priced of the two. Good zoom ring feel.
Bad : Odd 67mm filter thread size, perhaps too lightweight, looks cheap.

2nd : Sigma
Good : Image almost as good as Tamron at similar apertures, looks good and solid. Balances well on heavier bodies.
Bad : Large 82mm filter size, zoom ring hard to rotate, heavy, costliest of the three.

3rd : Tokina
Good : Cheapest of all, balances well on heavier bodies, nice build quality.
Bad : Poorest image wide open, heavy, zoom ring requires a larger arc to turn.

offspring · 9th September 2003

I have one copy, however, I haven't got the time to upload pictures.

My observation:
1) Usable at 2.8, relatively sharp (your mileage may differ)
2) Very sharp f4 onwards
3) No observation of corner softness (maybe because of 1.6x crop factor)
4) Color stauration not as rich as canon L (of course lah)
5) Very light (I beg to differ that we need heavy lens to balance heavy body)
6) Slower AF than USM/HSM
7) Good macro
8) Small filter size (not odd size really, filters are easily available)
9) Some people complained about this lens with 420EX, I tried - no problem

Summary: good travel lens, cheap and very good. My best value for money purchase. This will be my keeper lens.

Incidentally, this lens is EISA lens of the year 2003-2004 (http://www.eisa-awards.org/awards/2003-2004/photo.htm)

Here are some other people's pic using the Tamron

http://www.pbase.com/kuni/tamron_real_life_sharpness http://www.pbase.com/image/21049632/large
http://www.ayershome.org/users/amy/d30photos/

Newman · 9th September 2003

Thanks for your feedback guys. I think I'll be getting one today as I need this for a trip next week. Yes, I noticed that Tamron's lenses do not yield colours as nice as Canon's but I think they are good enough for me.

finkster · 9th September 2003

Filters of 67mm, yes, they can be easily found today at your regular shops, but how many of your other lenses are of this size? It's normally 62, 72, 77 and 82mm. Buying a 67mm Cir PL to go with one lens is an extra cost.

'Heavy' lenses may be a relative issue. Try using a light plastic lens on a body with a batt pack attached and flash, and compare that with a similar set-up but with a more solid feeling lens. The latter will definitely be better.

Newman · 9th September 2003

Originally Posted by finkster

1st : Tamron
Good : Best image quality, lightweight, mid-priced of the two. Good zoom ring feel.
Bad : Odd 67mm filter thread size, perhaps too lightweight, looks cheap.

Actually, I'm bringing this lens to Thailand. So it's good if it looks cheap as it will not encourage thieves. Though my first choice would be the Canon 24-70/f2.8L if I had the money for it now.

offspring · 9th September 2003

No lah. does not look cheap.

Originally Posted by Newman

Actually, I'm bringing this lens to Thailand. So it's good if it looks cheap as it will not encourage thieves. Though my first choice would be the Canon 24-70/f2.8L if I had the money for it now.

finkster · 9th September 2003

Any SLR will look like an attractive target for thieves, no matter what lens u use... better to keep it in a non-camera looking bag to be extra safe if u want, but thailand is generally still quite alrite. Depends on which part u go to. Been there a couple of times and I feel it's safe enough to use it in the open during the day.

YSLee · 10th September 2003

Geez, who really buys CP filters at each size? Buy a proper 77m and then step up.

Newman · 10th September 2003

Quick update:
Tried several test shots and I'm very happy with the results. The focussing is quite fast. And the pictures are sharp. At f2.8, the sharpness drops a little. I think for the price of $600+ and f2.8, this is a very good buy. I will probably keep this lens for travelling light even when I get the EF 24-70/f2.8L eventually. Thanks for all your help folks.

8th September 2003	#1
Newman Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: TBC Posts: 948	Tamron SP AF28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di Hi, I would like some feedback from anyone using the above lens. I heard that it's pretty good. If you can post some shots shot with this lens, I'd much appreciate it. Thanks in advance.

9th September 2003	#6
offspring Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 1,470	I have one copy, however, I haven't got the time to upload pictures. My observation: 1) Usable at 2.8, relatively sharp (your mileage may differ) 2) Very sharp f4 onwards 3) No observation of corner softness (maybe because of 1.6x crop factor) 4) Color stauration not as rich as canon L (of course lah) 5) Very light (I beg to differ that we need heavy lens to balance heavy body) 6) Slower AF than USM/HSM 7) Good macro 8) Small filter size (not odd size really, filters are easily available) 9) Some people complained about this lens with 420EX, I tried - no problem Summary: good travel lens, cheap and very good. My best value for money purchase. This will be my keeper lens. Incidentally, this lens is EISA lens of the year 2003-2004 (http://www.eisa-awards.org/awards/2003-2004/photo.htm) Here are some other people's pic using the Tamron http://www.pbase.com/kuni/tamron_real_life_sharpness http://www.pbase.com/image/21049632/large http://www.ayershome.org/users/amy/d30photos/ __________________ blog flickr

9th September 2003	#2
Snowcrash Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Western SG Posts: 1,507	Here is a discussion on the lens you mentioned

9th September 2003	#4
YSLee Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 2,262	I've had a very quick run through it, seems decent enough at f/2.8, with some slight corner softness (I believe it'll work great on DSLRs with APS sized sensors).

9th September 2003	#5
finkster Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: LAS Posts: 648	Did a quick test of the Tokina 287 28-70 F2.8 (the one CP was promoting), the Sigma 24-70 F2.8 DG DF and the Tamron 28-75 XR Di. Summary of the results were that the Tokina's image at 2.8 is unusable. Extremely soft. At F8 it is much better, almost as good as the Tamron at the same aperture. Tamron at 2.8 is slightly soft, but still acceptable. Sigma falls somewhere between the two in terms of sharpness and color. I would rank these lenses as such: 1st : Tamron Good : Best image quality, lightweight, mid-priced of the two. Good zoom ring feel. Bad : Odd 67mm filter thread size, perhaps too lightweight, looks cheap. 2nd : Sigma Good : Image almost as good as Tamron at similar apertures, looks good and solid. Balances well on heavier bodies. Bad : Large 82mm filter size, zoom ring hard to rotate, heavy, costliest of the three. 3rd : Tokina Good : Cheapest of all, balances well on heavier bodies, nice build quality. Bad : Poorest image wide open, heavy, zoom ring requires a larger arc to turn.

10th September 2003	#12
YSLee Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 2,262	Geez, who really buys CP filters at each size? Buy a proper 77m and then step up.