AF Nikkor 28-85 mm/3.5- 4.5 or Таmron 28-75, 2.8 ?

<p >I have to decide on the mid-tele zoom for NIKON D700:</p>

<p > </p>

<p >AF Nikkor 28-85 mm , f:3.5- 4.5</p>

<p >or</p>

<p >AF28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)</p>

<p > </p>

<p >The speed of the focus is irrelevant. The most important aspects are:</p>

<p > resistance to flare;</p>

<p > distortions at the short focus (28 mm)</p>

<p >sharp imaging in the corners at the short focus (28 mm) and the apertures 5.6 … 22</p>

<p >bokeh</p>

<p ><br>

I ask people having worked with these lenses to help me in decision making.<br>

Thanks in advance.</p>

<p>From those two choices, I would prefer the faster aperture of the Tamron. That extra one stop + can be very helpful. Personally, my choices in this range would be the Nikkor 24-85 f/2.8-4 over the 28-85. Better range, faster lens and 1:2 macro.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>If money doesn't come into the decision, go with the Nikkor. Plain and simple Lens from other companies are good but rarely surpass nikkor lens. Don't get me wrong, some other lens are excellent, but most of the time the nikon has the edge. Of course this is in my humble opion and not the only one.<br /> I have a nikon 24-85mm f2.8 AF-D and love it. try looking at that one. It will also work on FX and film cameras.</p>

<p>Alex,<br>

I belive Joseph hit right on the money regarding the <em>extra</em> edge!<br>

Adam</p>

<p>I have the Tamron 28-75mm and it is an excellent lens. I have not used the Nikon 28-85 you mention but I have to imagince the constant 2.8 would be of great help. This is considered one of the best mid-range zooms (if not the best) of the third party lenses for the Nikon. It is extremely sharp, quiet and the bokeh is magnificent. Stopped down to about 4 this lens is perfectly sharp in all areas. This is a new lens that is specially coated to reduce flare, which I have not had a problem with at all. Distortion is not an issue either. I would highly recommend this lens.</p>

<p>Can't compare as I own only the former (Nikon).<br>

It's the lens I usually have on my camera for catching my grand daughter running around. It's range was better on full frame than DX sensors, but I still like it. In fact I own two, one on loan to my daughter.<br>

It's a decent size and weight with a good feel to it and is constructed nicely. It focuses accurately for me at all FLs. It is sharp at most FLs over the whole image, but at 5.6 or larger at 28mm I can begin to see softness in the corners (on full frame, not visible on crop sensors). It's superb at flare resistance. It has a tiny bit of barrel distortion at the wide end, but not bad. And, dirt cheap too ... a plus.<br>

All this is based on my sample and my inference, your situation may be different.<br>

I've borrowed & used the 24-85 AFS Nikkor. If I were to buy this range today, I think I'd go with that one for the extra speed as indicated by others.<br>

Jim</p>

<p>I'm on board with Ryan...have it...love it......(the Tamron that is....)</p>

<p>i'd go for the tamron too. it's only real weakness is it's a little long on DX. i'm sure the nikon is good optically, but you cant really overemphasize the value of constant 2.8 aperture.</p>

<p>I have the Tamron as standard lens on my D700, it was a temporary(but it isn't anymore) used one and I could compare it with a Nikkor 28-70 2.8 and they were nearly equal in IQ.</p>

<p>I also recommend the Nikkor 24-85mm f/2.8-4 D Macro, a very versatile, clean full frame lens. It's my main lens.</p>

<p>I have 1st generation Tammy 28-75 2.8. Bought used from KEH. No regrets. Have not used the Nikon you speak of. Like Ryan said, it's tack sharp at f4. No problems with flare or distortion.</p>

<p>

<p >Thanks to all for the responses.</p>

<p >As I see, no one has used the two mentioned lenses…</p>

</p>

<p > </p>

<p> Hi Alex I have the nikon 28-85 3.5-4.5 and i have used it on my D300, D700 and F5. I love it provides a sharp image, I have used Tamron 28-75 but the build quality of the lens is not as great as nikon. In my opinion, I would stick with Nikon. I do not trust 3rd party lenses. In my opinion also, if you buy Nikon, use a Nikon lens, if you buy Canon, you use a Canon lens. I feel that you will probably have less problems.</p>

<p>Another one to consider would be the new Sigma EX 24-70 2.8 HSM.</p>

<p>"I have used Tamron 28-75 but the build quality of the lens is not as great as nikon. In my opinion, I would stick with Nikon. I do not trust 3rd party lenses. In my opinion also, if you buy Nikon, use a Nikon lens, if you buy Canon, you use a Canon lens. I feel that you will probably have less problems."</p>

<p>granted, the 28-75 won't win any beauty contests. it's a homely-looking lens. but it's sturdier than it appears--i've had it for 3 years, it's taken some dings, i've cracked a couple filters, but it still works. plus the guts are what really matter. it's very sharp. it "retired" my 18-70 nikon kit lens, which i had to stop down to f/9 to get the same sharpness as the tamron at f/4.</p>

<p>nothing wrong with brand loyalty, but the two nikon variable-aperture zooms are consumer-grade lenses, while the 28-75 is favorably comparable to the pro-spec 28-70 for IQ, which originally sold for $1200 before it was discontinued. the 28-75 does have smooth, non-jarring bokeh, much better than the 50/1.8. if you care that much about appearance rather than performance, you can always get a nikon lens cap and put it on the tamron. works great.</p><div></div>

<p>Tamron is ok, but I would stick with Nikon specially for a middle range lens you will use often. I own no third party lenses excet for 12 &15 mm CV for the Leica only because Leica did not cover that range.</p>

<p>" you can always get a nikon lens cap and put it on the tamron. works great."</p>

<p>I have put Tamron lens caps on all my Nikkors. They are state of the art lens caps!</p>

<p>I use the Tamron 28-75 on a Canon Eos 5D and am very impressed with the quality of it. My only criticism would be that the 75mm end changes focal length with focus and doesn't give the close range perspective that you might expect. The lens is very resistant to flare. I've also used the 24-70mm f/2.8 Sigma (large filter version), and quite frankly it was a piece of junk.</p>

<p>And quite frankly so is the tamron 28- 75 is junk get the nikon 28- 85</p>

<p>dave,</p>

<p>here's the photozone review of both.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>a very decent standard zoom. The resolution characteristics is very good throughout the zoom range and vignetting is very well controlled whereas distortions are about average for a lens in this class. CAs are a weak spot at 24mm only. Mechanically it is good quality consumer lens with a fast and near-silent AF.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>and:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>The resolution figures are among the highest tested among the standard zoom lenses - the center resolution is generally excellent and the borders follow closely on very good to excellent levels. The distortions are very low as is the amount of vignetting and even CAs are very well under control.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>can you tell from the description which is which?</p>

<p>I have the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and tested the Nikon 28-85 f/3.5-4.5 just the other day in my workplace on a DX-sensor camera, so I can't comment corner sharpnes on a full frame. But on a DX-sensor, based on my quick (non-scientific) test, the Tamron wins (IMHO) in IQ, sharpness on smaller apertures and in bokeh comparison. And the constant f/2.8 is a great thing to have. So I would go with Tamron. It's my most used lens and I have been extremely pleased with the results I can get with it. Certainly not a junk lens.</p>

<p>Another very choose is the AFS 24-85mm f3.5-4.5G, fast focus! Although you can only get it secondhand now, worth look around for it!</p>

<p >Many thanks to all participants, and especially – to Janne Kaakinen and </p>

<p >Dave Petley having the relevant experience.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Dave, have you compared the imaging quality of the mentioned lenses ?<br>

You have clarified the building quality, and it would be very important to have your opinion on the images on FF.</p>

<p>The 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 is incredibly sharp, cheap, and well liked by both Thom Hogan:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>http://www.bythom.com/2485lens.htm</p>

</blockquote>

<p>and Ken Rockwell:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>(sorry can't put the link, Photo.net blocks them!)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I love mine, though I prefer the 35-70mm f2.8 (the 24-85mm is literally too contrasty for me).</p>

<p>Unfortunately I've been using these on DX, so I can't say for FX.</p>

<p>Sorry, meant to say that Tamron is sharper on larger apertures (f/3.5-5.6), such a basic mistake. :)</p>