Lens Advice - Tamron quality

[emma_garfield]

<p><strong>****I AM NOT LOOKING FOR RUDE COMMENTS</strong><br>

I am looking to buy a new lens. I was currently using the Canon 1.8 50MM, although some might not like it, I found it worked great for me. Especially considering the value price. Unfortunately, I dropped my lens yesterday at a shot onto concrete and it is now dead. I was already considering purchasing a new lens before this lens broke.<br>

Price is important to me. So I can't spend too much out of my buget than I already am. I have narrowed it down to two lens.<br>

Canon 50MM 1.4 - I have used this lens but sometimes I have found that it has focusing problems for me. But I am willing to work with it if I have to. What really turns me off from this lens, is that it's fixed.<br>

Tamron 28MM - 75MM 2.8 - I have never used a Tamron before. I really like the price of this lens and the fact that is a zoom lens.<br>

I do mainly portraits and events.<br>

So which one is worth it? Do you have another lens you can possibly suggest.</p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Faith</p>

[kazwiltshire]

<p>HI Faith I cant comment on the Tamron but the 50mm 1.4 is a great lens for portraits on a crop body. I have it and use it almost exclusively with my 50D for portraits, I also have a 17-55 2.8 which i use for events. Hope this helps<br>

Karen </p>

[acedigital]

<p>Hi Faith - give us some more information, what camera do you use, what type of shooting do you do and what is your budget? The Tamron seems like a good value, but I do not have hands on experience with that lens. Here are some reviews of Canon and several 3rd party lenses from <a href="http://bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/tamron_28_75.html">Bob Atkins.</a> This link is specifically to this Tamron lens and he gives it a very good review comparing it to two mid-priced Canon lenses.</p>

 

[jamesgysen]

<p>Faith, I can speak on the <em>quality</em> of the Tamron products (as to my own limited experience) however not specifically to the 28-75. I have owned Tamron lenses for about two years and would recommend them with no hesitation. My 17-50, while not as quiet as some others, has been excellent right from day one. It's unfortunately even been dropped onto concrete and survived. Many third party lenses can be a very cost effective solution. Good luck.</p>

<p>Regards, James.</p>

[esfishdoc]

<p>Here is a very reliable endorsement for the Tamron you are looking at. Read what Roger has to say about it. I put a lot of stock in his opinion about lenses.... he uses and handles more stock then 100's of us mere mortals put together....</p>

<p><a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/lenses/normal-range/tamron-28-75mm-f2.8-xr-di-ld-for-canon">http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/lenses/normal-range/tamron-28-75mm-f2.8-xr-di-ld-for-canon</a><br>

Richard</p>

 

[ed_v.]

 

<p>Faith, I have the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and like it a lot. It's not quite as sharp as my 50 f/1.8 (when set for f/2.8), but I use it more since it is a zoom. I'm not a professional, I use it mostly for informal or candid portraits of my family and sometimes for indoor sports. Hope this helps.</p>

 

 

[jeff_palmucci]

<p>I had the Tamron 28-75. Wide open, its pretty soft in the corners. Traded it in for a 24-70L. Online comparison here: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=366&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=101&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0</p>

[tom_harvey3]

<p>Faith, you've come to a forum filled with some very helpful people, but what's with the opening line? It's as if you expect us to be rude, so you need to micromanage and set the ground rules for us to give you answers? Hmmmm.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>I use the Tamron 28-75mm lens to shoot weddings professionally. I own two copies so I can switch off on maintenance and overhaul. It is very close in image quality to the Canon 24-70mm f2.8 lens. It is soft in the corners, which does not mean much when shooting portraits and events. It is still sharp wide open on the wide end but a hair not-so-sharp on wide open on the long end. However it sharpens up nicely in post.</p>

<p>If you are using a cropped sensor camera, I'd get the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. I also have a copy of the lens. It is a more useful range for events.</p>

<p>It used to be that you had to watch QC on the 28-75mm to be sure you got a good one. However, if you buy new, a Tamron has a 6 year warranty.</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>I have not used a Tamron EF lens but own two FD lenses. Optically the (old) Tamrons are very good - close to Canon and at least my pair have been very durable. Once we went AF I abandoned 3rd party lenses after I bought a Sigma 14 F3.5 that was not really compatible. Check the AF speed against the Canon if this is fine then you should be OK. I currently only use one non Canon lens the Sigma 8mm F3.5 (until a few weeks ago there was no Canon option). the lens is fine but the Af sucks - and on an 8mm lens focusing should not be a big challenge!</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>Faith, what exactly were the focusing problems you had with the 50/1.4? Did it hunt in low light, front or back focus, or was it something else?</p>

<p>I've had mine for years and have never experienced any problems with its AF.</p>

[kari v]

<p>Pick either Tamron 17-50/2.8 or Sigma 18-50/2.8, both are very nice and cover the range from wide angle to small tele. Tamron makes some noise when focusing, Sigma's silent. Image quality is good, Tamron is usually the winner in tests but Sigma's very good too and in some test the winner. I didn't find any massive difference myself.<br /> For some $ more take a look at Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS (stabilized).</p>

<p>28-75 Tamron is a fine lens but are you sure you don't want wide angle coverage at all? I know I like 75mm tele quite a bit more than 50mm but still...</p>

[jim_j2]

<p>Faith,<br>

I own both the Canon 50/1.4 and the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, and like Mark P, I've never experienced any problems with the Canon's AF, but am aware of other's who have. Guess I just lucked out and got a good sample.<br>

Anyway, . . . in my experience, I find the Tamron's build quality, AF, & image quality to be excellent for it's cost.<br>

Although I always carry both the Canon 50/1.4 and he Tamron 17-50/2.8 in my bag, I have never hesitated grabbing the Tamron if I feel that I will need a shorter focal length than 50mm. Their image quality IMHO is very similiar in day to day use.<br>

The Tamron 17-50 that I have is not the image stabilized version (can't remember Tamrons designation for IS) which is claimed to produce a bit more sharpness than the stabilized version.<br>

Best wishes in your decision,<br>

Jim j.</p>

[charles_tuthill]

<p>Tamron 17-50 sounds like it would be a good match. It's tough to categorize all tamron lenses but they are generally very good. I had a 17-35mm (discontinued) which I loved. Found that I did not use it much after getting a Tamron 10-24. Ended up selling both as I was not always happy with the corners at the wide end of the 10-24; used the proceeds to buy a canon 10-22. After getting the Canon, I discovered that the Tamron was just as good for most situations (at least 90%) except at the wide end - the tammy's corners were problematic under 14mm. I still miss the 17-35, it was a lens I could always count on, but I like the canon 10-22 quite a bit. So, all of this is to say that yes, there are some excellent Tamron lenses but you have to do research on each one. The 28-75 has a great reputation as does the 17-50 that others have suggested. The 10-24mm that I purchased has a decent reputation, but it also had some well known flaws. Make sure to take a close look at the reviews but my instinct tells me that you would not be disappointed with either a 28-75mm or a 17-50mm.</p>

[dan_johnson11]

<p>Faith, the Tamron 28-75 is quite a good lens, at least in my experience. I would recommend it over the equivalent focal length and price Canon, which I did not like. The Tamron is a bit soft when wide open but that's easily remedied by stopping down to f/4 or so. And wide open its softness might be a plus for some portraits. The Canon is a good lens but it has too much CA at the long end for my tastes.</p>

<p>That said, I would go with a prime because it will be a sharper lens. The Canon 85mm f/1.8 is a sweet lens and not expensive. The 50mm f1.4 is great, too.</p>