Tamron SP AF 28-75 f/2.8 LD (IF) Macro

[jamiew]

I am looking for feedback on this lens from people that have used

it. Specifically I want to know how this Tamron compares to the

Canon 24-70 2.8L in optical quality. I know it is not 100% as good,

but I want to know how well it can subsititure for the Canon L for

wedding use, travel, and family photos.

 

I am asking this because I need a normal zoom lens, and need f2.8

but I do not want the Canon 24-70 L (not interest in it's cost or

weight). In addition to this lens I have already decided to get the

Canon 17-40, and the 70-200 2.8. Please do not suggest any

alternatives. A few points:

 

I like the Tamron's focal length range.

I am not getting this because it calls itself a Macro.

I am using a Canon 10D

 

Thanks in advance.

[awindsor]

I was in the store handling these lenses last week. The Tamron is light and autofocus

is positive though not as fast as the USM on the Canon. The zoom ring operates in

the opposite direction to Canon lenses. I was comparing handling and cannot

comment directly on the optical characteristics. On the Tamron lens I was using the

MF ring rotated during focusing. This was very strange to me since I am used to

keeping my fingers on the MF ring to tweak focus using FTM.

 

There does seem to be some quality variation in these lenses.

 

Practical Photography reviewed this lens in their latest issue. It won hands down for

handling but the Sigma 24-70/2.8 beat it for optical quality. Their pictures of a test

charts show their Sigma to be significantly sharper wide-open at both ends of the

zoom range than their Tamron. This was based on edge performance on a full frame

camera so the 10D performance is probably closer.

[rich_hannah]

yeah, i bought this lens about 2 months ago and have been using it on my EOS1n. Yes, wide open it does fall short of the Sigma and the L series canon. However, the sigma is a very big lens and filters will cost you much more. My only gripe with the lens is the vignetting wide open at 28mm . It really is visible, but you'll find this in many much more expensive lenses. I researched this lens thoroughly before buying and although the vignetting at the extremes can be very irritating, i just stop down slightly or reframe with my feet slightly to avoid using 28mm. It is after all very rare that you will require 28mm at f2.8 (IMO) This is an excellent lens and for the price i urge you to at least test it. P.S - I like well built, solid equipment and the Tamron is very robust.

Rich

[gaius1]

I have this lens almost permanently mounted on my EOS D30. On the whole I am pleased with it; optically it is a good match for the D30, and it's relatively fast, small, light and cheap. Using the lens hood helps with contrast. It has a lock mechanism to prevent the creep that so irks me on the 28-135 IS. Having said that, I wouldn't use it on my EOS 3; once you've gotten used to the speed and silence of USM, the Tamron will seem slow to AF and loud while it does so. If you need fast AF and/or environmental sealing, I think that's where the biggest gaps between it and the Canon are.<div></div>

[yakim_peled1]

Let's see. You only need to cover the 40-70 range and you won't go for the 24-70 for it's cost and weight. Well, if you must have a zoom then the Tamron 28-75/2.8 is a very good candidate, the best perhaps. A friend of mine tested it against the 28-70/2.8 USM L and they were very close. However, what about the 50/1.4? That way you get 2 additional stops and USM. Just a thought. HTH.

 

Happy shooting ,

Yakim.

[lumiere photo productions]

hello Jamie,

I have this lens for my eos 3 and I love it.It is the best solution for its price(canon or others). It will not focus as fast or as quiet as a canon ring usm lens but the optical quality is great. I have used it alot and have sold some prints taken with it.I am not a full time pro but I do sell some prints from time to time.As far as digital use I have also used it on a 10d and it gives great results.I hope this helps.

p.s. I also have the 24-70L and it is a beast with great optical quality but the 28-75 tamron is a great alternative for travel or hiking. The tamron has nice bokeh also.

[david arnold eugene, oreg]

Pop Photo tested both the Tamron lens and the Canon 24-70 2.8 L last years. Distortion minimal in both lenses except (if memory serves me correctly) noticeable barrel distortion in the Canon at 28 and noticeable pincushion in the Tamron at 75. The SQF test charts for the two lenses at various apertures and focal lengths had 105 cells that could be directly compared. Of the 105, the Tamron had higher scores in 100 of them, the lenses were identical in 4 cells, and the Canon came out on top in only 1! Based on that, and on comments on this and other sites, I bought the Tamron. Optically its what I had hoped for. Size and weight are a delight (18 oz., vs. 33 oz. for the Canon). Although the light weight might suggest otherwise, build quality is excellent. However fit and finish doe fall short of that on my L's, zoom ring is a bit stiff (this is a universal complaint--it's not just on mine), focus motor is noisier than I'm used to, and the lack of full-time manual is a definite inconvenience.

 

Bottom line: if money were no object I'd get the Canon, but at $350 vs. $1150 it's no contest.