panayotis_papadopoulos

<p>I was reading an article of DXO comparison of the Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD vs the above mentioned Nikon lens, one of Nikon's Holy Trinity lenses.<br /> <a href="http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Tamron-SP-24-70mm-f-2.8-Di-VC-USD-Nikon-review-An-affordable-fast-standard-zoom-that-comes-out-on-top">http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Tamron-SP-24-70mm-f-2.8-Di-VC-USD-Nikon-review-An-affordable-fast-standard-zoom-that-comes-out-on-top</a><br /> I am not an FX shooter (D300s & D7000 owner), therefore I have very little experience with the Nikon lens and no experience with the Tamron candidate. But it really came to my surprise reading that Tamron, even with a very subtle difference produces sharper images and has low level of Chromatic Aberration, much better CA than the corresponding Nikon lens. I thought that even if Tamron could equal the Nikon, it would be a great success for them. But finding out that not only equals the Nikon but it performs slightly better as far as sharpness and chromatic aberration is concerned and at almost half of the price plus VC, then someone must wonder if the Nikon lens found a very serious competitor that claims the throne...<br /> In real life, has anyone of you who tried out both lenses agrees with the DXO results? What are your experiences or thoughts...Cheers!</p>