Nikon 24-70 f2.8 vs tamron 28-75 f2.8

entitybeing · 15th February 2009

hi to all out there, ive a couple of questions in mind.
how is the image quality of tamron 28-75 f2.8 when it stands on its own?
how is the image quality of TAMRON 28-75 F2.8 against nikon's 24-70 f2.8?
and is it worth paying that extra 2k+ more? thanks

alexyap1205 · 15th February 2009

I have a Tamron 28-75 F2.8. And I should say it is quite sharp and I am very impressed on what what it could give me for the price. I don't have image to share though as the lens is not with me as of the moment. One thing is that it's quite slow and noisy when focusing. I am sure the Nikkor one would be better, but it is like S$2000.00 more expensive.

Hope this helps.

catchlights · 15th February 2009

Originally Posted by entitybeing

hi to all out there, ive a couple of questions in mind.
how is the image quality of tamron 28-75 f2.8 when it stands on its own?
how is the image quality of TAMRON 28-75 F2.8 against nikon's 24-70 f2.8?
and is it worth paying that extra 2k+ more? thanks

this is very subjective. only you yourself can have the answer you want.

suggest you rent these two lenses do a side by side comparision.

if you are very happy what Tamron 28-75 f2.8 can give you, take the Tamron.

and looking for something better, can tahan the weight, have 2K to spare, go for the Nikon.

tanandrew · 15th February 2009

How abt Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 i'm using it so far so good of couse if have budget go for Nikon

Stress · 15th February 2009

Usually this equation holds.....Price = Quality
Both with high corelation!
Go rent a 24-70 f2.8 or borrow from fellow CSer (if he/she willing to lend) and you'll understand my equation. Tamron will give good pictures too if taken with the right composition.....

cjdwaja · 15th February 2009

Myself is satisfied with tamron 28-75 f2.8, the picture is sharp enough, even quite noisy and a bit slow to get focus.

So, It depend on your budget. If you have bugdet to buy around 2K for Nikon, just buy it.
I believe the quality much better lah....

Squid · 15th February 2009

Originally Posted by entitybeing

hi to all out there, ive a couple of questions in mind.
how is the image quality of tamron 28-75 f2.8 when it stands on its own?
how is the image quality of TAMRON 28-75 F2.8 against nikon's 24-70 f2.8?
and is it worth paying that extra 2k+ more? thanks

Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 lens, on its own, is a good lens. It works well in stationary or near staionary situation with adequate to good sharpeness at aperture F4.0 till F11 and adequate lighting situations. Generally, it is a value-for-money lens that rivals the original camera makers' lens like Canon, Minolta, Nikon or Pentax. It is also known to be significantly lighter than its Nikon counter-part.

More information with technical measurement or users review or both and located outside Clubsnap are at :
SLR Gear
Photozone
Fred Miranda
Popular Photography
The Digital Picture
photo.net

More information inside Clubsnap at these threads via its own search function
Thread 1
Thread 2
Thread 3
Thread 4
Thread 5
Thread 6

I opted for Nikon as it is able to take pictures wide open at F2.8 aperture and it is able to focus faster due to AF-S capability against AF capability for Tamron lens.

cichlid · 15th February 2009

You can try the Nikon 24-70mm lens at the Nikon showroom...it will sure have you addicted, heehe

soeypixels · 16th February 2009

today i just rent the 24-70 on the D700
SHIOK

but it does hunt a little during low light
and i shot the whole wedding w/o a flash at 3200ISO
Double SHIOK

the price is kind of killer but theres afew 2nd hand on the BnS
and is quite heavy considering i do not have a grip and flash

Lord Soth · 16th February 2009

I've come across some side by side review of these 2 lenses sometime back.

Here's the main gist of the comparison :-

At f/2.8, the Nikon lens is slightly sharper at the edges and has better contrast throughout. A good Tamron lens should still be sharp wide open though.

At f/4 onwards, there is no significant optical difference. The Tamron peaks here in optical performance.

So if you absolutely want the "BEST", and are willing to pay the extra $$$ and carry the 1 kilo lens around, get the Nikkor lens.

On the other hand, if you are looking for a compact and lightweight lens which is value for money and can rival the Nikkor lens at f/4 onwards, get the Tamron.

There are satisfied customers from both camps. BTW, so far, I have not come across any reviews of people returning their Tamron 28-75 for the Nikkor 24-70 or vice versa. Be sure to get the "Made in Japan" version of the Tamron if you are interested.

deklan · 16th February 2009

Originally Posted by Lord Soth

I've come across some side by side review of these 2 lenses sometime back.

Here's the main gist of the comparison :-

At f/2.8, the Nikon lens is slightly sharper at the edges and has better contrast throughout. A good Tamron lens should still be sharp wide open though.

At f/4 onwards, there is no significant optical difference. The Tamron peaks here in optical performance.

can link this comparison? cause i seriously doubt the standard of the test...
if the results of the test is true, it must be a miracle tamron piece...

earthling82 · 16th February 2009

Tamron 17-50mm
Weight: 430g
Filter Attachment Size: 67mm
Lens Construction: 16 elements in 13 group
Diaphragm Blade: 7 pcs

Nikon 17-55mm
Weight: 755g
Filter Attachment Size: 77mm
Lens Construction: 14 elements in 10 group
Diaphragm Blade: ?

The Tamron is smaller in diameter and lighter - though it has more glass. I'm going for my Tamron 28-75mm next pay day

. No money for nikkor

earthling82 · 16th February 2009

Originally Posted by soeypixels

today i just rent the 24-70 on the D700
SHIOK

but it does hunt a little during low light
and i shot the whole wedding w/o a flash at 3200ISO
Double SHIOK

the price is kind of killer but theres afew 2nd hand on the BnS
and is quite heavy considering i do not have a grip and flash

mind if I ask you! Is this the nikkor one? HOw do you find the zooming - is it adequate for the event shooting? thanx

Daedalus Trent · 16th February 2009

Originally Posted by earthling82

Tamron 17-50mm
Weight: 430g
Filter Attachment Size: 67mm
Lens Construction: 16 elements in 13 group
Diaphragm Blade: 7 pcs

Nikon 17-55mm
Weight: 755g
Filter Attachment Size: 77mm
Lens Construction: 14 elements in 10 group
Diaphragm Blade: ?

The Tamron is smaller in diameter and lighter - though it has more glass. I'm going for my Tamron 28-75mm next pay day . No money for nikkor

huh? Why are you comparing the Tamron 17-50 and the Nikkor 17-55??

Lord Soth · 16th February 2009

Originally Posted by deklan

can link this comparison? cause i seriously doubt the standard of the test...
if the results of the test is true, it must be a miracle tamron piece...

Sorry it was some time ago.

I think it was one of the threads on the DPreview forum.

As for the standard of the test, the owner of both lenses took pictures using a tripod etc and posted the results side by side. It's good enough for me.

Even the Canon users are praising their purchase of the Tamron 28-75 lens so I'm not surprised at the results.

deklan · 16th February 2009

Originally Posted by Lord Soth

Sorry it was some time ago.

Even the Canon users are praising their purchase of the Tamron 28-75 lens so I'm not surprised at the results.

thats because canon users dont have our 24-70

earthling82 · 16th February 2009

Originally Posted by Daedalus Trent

huh? Why are you comparing the Tamron 17-50 and the Nikkor 17-55??

oops repost

Tamron 28-75mm
Weight: 510g
Filter Attachment Size: 67mm
Lens Construction: 16 elements in 14 group
Diaphragm Blade: 7 pcs

Nikon 24-70mm
Weight: 900g

Filter Attachment Size: 77mm
Lens Construction: 15 elements in 11 group
Diaphragm Blade: ?

Daedalus Trent · 16th February 2009

Originally Posted by earthling82

oops repost

Tamron 28-75mm
Weight: 510g
Filter Attachment Size: 67mm
Lens Construction: 16 elements in 14 group
Diaphragm Blade: 7 pcs

Nikon 24-70mm
Weight: 900g
Filter Attachment Size: 77mm
Lens Construction: 15 elements in 11 group
Diaphragm Blade: ?

yea, 900g

indeed

Lord Soth · 16th February 2009

Originally Posted by deklan

thats because canon users dont have our 24-70

Whoa!!!

That statement will start off World War 3

But I'm glad that Tamron is able to bridge the gap between Nikon and Canon. At long last, Nikon and Canon users can agree on something, which is the fact that the Tamron 28-75 is a very good piece of glass for both systems.

catchlights · 16th February 2009

Originally Posted by deklan

thats because canon users dont have our 24-70

you better read up properly and write carefully.

Canon introduce Canon EF 24 - 70 mm F2.8 L USM lens in 2002. long before the Nikon 24~70 f2.8

15th February 2009	#1
entitybeing Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Singapore Posts: 72	Nikon 24-70 f2.8 vs tamron 28-75 f2.8 hi to all out there, ive a couple of questions in mind. how is the image quality of tamron 28-75 f2.8 when it stands on its own? how is the image quality of TAMRON 28-75 F2.8 against nikon's 24-70 f2.8? and is it worth paying that extra 2k+ more? thanks __________________ \|D300\|MB-D10\|N70-200F2.8VR\|T17-50F2.8\|T11-16 F2.8 \| N50F1.8\|N10.5F2.8 FE\|SB800\|

15th February 2009	#2
alexyap1205 Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Singapore Posts: 124	Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 vs tamron 28-75 f2.8 I have a Tamron 28-75 F2.8. And I should say it is quite sharp and I am very impressed on what what it could give me for the price. I don't have image to share though as the lens is not with me as of the moment. One thing is that it's quite slow and noisy when focusing. I am sure the Nikkor one would be better, but it is like S$2000.00 more expensive. Hope this helps. __________________ M Y S I G N A T U R E :)

15th February 2009	#4
tanandrew Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Singapore Posts: 544	Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 vs tamron 28-75 f2.8 How abt Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 i'm using it so far so good of couse if have budget go for Nikon __________________ Nikon D300\|50mm\|Sigma 24-70mm\|Sony CX7\|LX3\|Multiply /Foto

15th February 2009	#5
Stress Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,951	Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 vs tamron 28-75 f2.8 Usually this equation holds.....Price = Quality Both with high corelation! Go rent a 24-70 f2.8 or borrow from fellow CSer (if he/she willing to lend) and you'll understand my equation. Tamron will give good pictures too if taken with the right composition..... __________________ Blacklisted List......Underdog.

15th February 2009	#6
cjdwaja New Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: PaRis Posts: 20	Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 vs tamron 28-75 f2.8 Myself is satisfied with tamron 28-75 f2.8, the picture is sharp enough, even quite noisy and a bit slow to get focus. So, It depend on your budget. If you have bugdet to buy around 2K for Nikon, just buy it. I believe the quality much better lah....

15th February 2009	#8
cichlid Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: S'pore Posts: 1,654	Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 vs tamron 28-75 f2.8 You can try the Nikon 24-70mm lens at the Nikon showroom...it will sure have you addicted, heehe __________________ D90 & P5100

16th February 2009	#9
soeypixels Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 666	Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 vs tamron 28-75 f2.8 today i just rent the 24-70 on the D700 SHIOK but it does hunt a little during low light and i shot the whole wedding w/o a flash at 3200ISO Double SHIOK the price is kind of killer but theres afew 2nd hand on the BnS and is quite heavy considering i do not have a grip and flash

16th February 2009	#10
Lord Soth Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Dargaard Keep Posts: 349	Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 vs tamron 28-75 f2.8 I've come across some side by side review of these 2 lenses sometime back. Here's the main gist of the comparison :- At f/2.8, the Nikon lens is slightly sharper at the edges and has better contrast throughout. A good Tamron lens should still be sharp wide open though. At f/4 onwards, there is no significant optical difference. The Tamron peaks here in optical performance. So if you absolutely want the "BEST", and are willing to pay the extra $$$ and carry the 1 kilo lens around, get the Nikkor lens. On the other hand, if you are looking for a compact and lightweight lens which is value for money and can rival the Nikkor lens at f/4 onwards, get the Tamron. There are satisfied customers from both camps. BTW, so far, I have not come across any reviews of people returning their Tamron 28-75 for the Nikkor 24-70 or vice versa. Be sure to get the "Made in Japan" version of the Tamron if you are interested. __________________ *\| Nikon* D700; AF-S 14-24 f/2.8GED; AF 20 f/2.8D; AF 50 f/1.4D; SB400\| Tamron AF 28-75 f/2.8 A09NII\|** Last edited by Lord Soth; 16th February 2009 at 08:21 AM.

16th February 2009	#12
earthling82 Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 184	Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 vs tamron 28-75 f2.8 Tamron 17-50mm Weight: 430g Filter Attachment Size: 67mm Lens Construction: 16 elements in 13 group Diaphragm Blade: 7 pcs Nikon 17-55mm Weight: 755g Filter Attachment Size: 77mm Lens Construction: 14 elements in 10 group Diaphragm Blade: ? The Tamron is smaller in diameter and lighter - though it has more glass. I'm going for my Tamron 28-75mm next pay day . No money for nikkor Last edited by earthling82; 16th February 2009 at 09:29 AM.