Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 37 of 37

Thread: Alternative to Canon EF 28-135 IS USM

  1. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    singapore, East
    Posts
    322

    Default

    After much reading you guys really change my mind too of buying 28-135 IS (thats what I love about this forum )

    So anyone got 300D with this lens (Tamron 24-135 f/3.5-5.6). Any error messages.

  2. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ivor
    Sorry, guys... I can't help notice that Tamron 24-135 f/3.5-5.6 seems to be the main subject for this thread.

    Does that mean the Sigma 24-135 f/2.8-4.5 IF mentioned in the early part of the thread is not good at all. The rating in Photography Review printed 4 of 5.

    http://www.photographyreview.com/PRD...5_3128crx.aspx

    Both the Sigma & Canon have a min focus distance of 50 cm while Tamron has a min focus distance of 40 cm.

    hehehe .... sori, but 4/5 based on a review of One person does not give me a good collective view of this product .

    However, a collective view of Tamron SP AF24-135mm F/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical by 60 people with a rating of 4.65/5 does provide some insight to this lens .

    I would not say Sigma is no good, neither would I say Tamron is perfect, but it is up to individual preference.

    Personally, I always have confidence with Tamron Lenses ..... If only they could come out wider angle lens ........ Well .... Just dreaming here

  3. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    photozone
    Posts
    284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadus
    oh!
    so rare to find someone who admits tamron over canon way to go!!!
    just curious why nobody is concerned wif the compatibility of tamron lenses wif future DSLR ? at least Sigma provides free re-chipping ...

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    I'm a Llama!
    Posts
    4,751

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadus
    oh!
    so rare to find someone who admits tamron over canon way to go!!!
    Oi, how's the Crumpler bag holding up?

    I must admit I was a bit wary of the Tamron initially but after my experience with the 28-135 IS, I was willing to try anything.

    To the guys thinking of dumping the Canon... It's important that you try any lens out for yourself and decide. Our experiences can always be different so if you have the opportunity to spend a day with each lens, I strongly encourage you to do so. Reviews can only say so much, shooting styles vary and this is a huge factor in the overall performance of lens and camera. I was fortunate to be able to use the lenses and tried them out at my own leisure (at a price of course when I brought the Canon in to exchange for the Tamron, had to waive my bargaining rights).

    The Tamron is of much better build quality than the Canon. I found the Canon barrel to be a bit loose, it could amost swivel up and down. That was a real surprise. And it also had a cheap plasticky feel to it. The Tamron is built like a tank, only thing I found the zoom ring very stiff. You almost need to grip it in order to turn. Same filter size the two of them. The AF is slower on the Tamron and a little noisy. But I still love it!

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    12,938

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ivor
    Sorry, guys... I can't help notice that Tamron 24-135 f/3.5-5.6 seems to be the main subject for this thread.

    Does that mean the Sigma 24-135 f/2.8-4.5 IF mentioned in the early part of the thread is not good at all. The rating in Photography Review printed 4 of 5.

    http://www.photographyreview.com/PRD...5_3128crx.aspx

    Both the Sigma & Canon have a min focus distance of 50 cm while Tamron has a min focus distance of 40 cm.
    There's only one review, so the rating may not be that meaningful... have read several posts in www.dpreview.com forums that the Sigma is worse off compared to the Tamron 24-135 or the Canon 28-135.

  6. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by victor
    just curious why nobody is concerned wif the compatibility of tamron lenses wif future DSLR ? at least Sigma provides free re-chipping ...
    Send back to Tilties Marketing (I got the spelling wrong ... 1. I am Dysenix, 2. I can never spell their company correctly .... LOL)

  7. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    photozone
    Posts
    284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blurblock
    Send back to Tilties Marketing (I got the spelling wrong ... 1. I am Dysenix, 2. I can never spell their company correctly .... LOL)
    think Tithe (?) will charge for the re chipping even if they can do it.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    I'm a Llama!
    Posts
    4,751

    Default

    Took a couple of test shots with the Tamron 24-135 SP, Canon 10D on tripod. The images are unedited except for a resize.

    http://www.pbase.com/image/23863693/original
    http://www.pbase.com/image/23863539/original

  9. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by victor
    think Tithe (?) will charge for the re chipping even if they can do it.
    Yup .... They will ..... but whether if it is worth the price or not? If Tamron lens is superior to similar sigma lens then it is worth it to pay the price for rechipping. If the Tamron lens in question is similar or inferior, then there is no point........

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    12,938

    Default

    haven't really heard of cases where Tamron lens need to rechip....

  11. #31
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    448

    Default

    Personally, I always have confidence with Tamron Lenses .....
    I would say, I always have confidence with Tamron SP Lenses . While for Sigma...er, maybe EX lenses? But the Sigma 24-135 is not EX, right?

  12. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    I'm a Llama!
    Posts
    4,751

    Default

    Another unedited test shot with the Tamron. Night time at Changi airport. I'm really having fun with this wonderful lens!

    http://www.pbase.com/image/23872580/original

  13. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    I'm a Llama!
    Posts
    4,751

  14. #34

    Default

    oh, u're the one who sold me the bag...haha. paisei paisei. bag is good , just tht rite now its just sitting in my living room.

  15. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Terence
    Another unedited test shot with the Tamron. Night time at Changi airport. I'm really having fun with this wonderful lens!

    http://www.pbase.com/image/23872580/original
    Wow, how did you capture such a close up shot?

  16. #36

    Default

    About this debate between Canon and Tamron, I think at the end of the day, it's what one wants. 10 people saying that the Tamron is "better" than Canon while only 1 says otherwise doesn't mean that Tamron is indeed better. I mean what if all the 10 are amateurs and the tests were crudely done? Moreover, how were the tests performed? Are they objective in the approach? Even if so, I think it is fair to say all these tests are simple that -- tests. What gives the final kick is the practical use of the lens, not just in the laboratory... and that of course includes the use of skills involved in photography.

    You won't go wrong with Canon lenses, that's for sure. Where the Tamron might score a tad higher in terms of sharpness (I'm not supporting any brand here, neither have I done any tests to verify this), Canon kicks its butt by providing USM and IS function, which may be all that matters in deciding which to get if you do a lot of handheld shots in fairly low light.

    Personally, if asked to choose, I'd favour more with the Canon for its IS. The Tamron and Canon have wide zoom range and they are slow lenses at 135mm, f/5.6. The IS could prove useful. But that's only me. If there are other intentions, the Tamron might prove to be the one for you.

  17. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    I'm a Llama!
    Posts
    4,751

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kiwi2
    Wow, how did you capture such a close up shot?
    Don't think it was that close was it? It was only at 77mm (120mm crop). Shot from the parking lot in front of terminal 1.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •