about | support
home
 

Search Used

Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 XR Di Zoom AF

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
175 339621 Jun 16, 2010
Recommended By Average Price
85% of reviewers $357.83
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
7.96
9.21
8.6
28-75mm

Specifications:
The most compact and lightest in the history of fast zoom lenses. Thanks to the revolutionary downsizing "XR" technology employed by Tamron in the development of high-power zoom lenses such as the 28-200mm and 28-300mm, the dramatic compactness that makes this lens the world's smallest and lightest is achieved. Its compactness makes it look and feel like an ordinary standard zoom lens, yet the versatility that a fast constant maximum aperture offers will definitely reshape your photographic horizons.


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11>  next
      
fStopJojo
Offline
[ X ]



Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 327
Review Date: Mar 31, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $340.00 | Rating: 7 

Pros: Lightweight for f2.8 zoom, fairly sharp wide open even, good to very good colors and contrast, controls flare well, only very slight CA, good bokeh, locks focus well, lens cap design nice for easy removal.
Cons:
Feels very plasticky (i.e., cheap) compared to Canon L or Sigma EX line, slow AF, external focus ring rotates during AF, rear cap frustrating to put on.

I've had 2 of these lenses in the past year and wanted very much to like it but the MAIN reasons why it's not one of my favorites is: build and slow AF speed. The reasonable, objective user of this lens who has used Canon's 24-70L or Sigma's 24-70 EX must conclude the same. Optically it can be very good, however. I've posted many more comments, images, and comparisons at my site. Feel free to email me. fStopJojo@yahoo.com

www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/lenstests


Mar 31, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add fStopJojo to your Buddy List  
Steve_T2
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 29, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Mar 29, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Constant f/2.8, image quality, sharpness, value for money, size/weight.
Cons:
Noisier and slightly slower AF compared to Canon, make sure you test it properly and get a sharp one...

What a cracking lens! I was a bit reluctant to try a third party lens on my 350D, but read such good reports on this lens that I had to give it a try - especially at the price.

Unfortunately my first one was unacceptably soft throughout its focal range at f/2.8, so I sent it back. According to some photography forums, others have had the same problem.

Rather than risk another mail order return, I went to my local camera shop who had one that was brand new but had been sitting on the shelf for a little while. The advantage of this (in my mind) was that it was assembled in Japan before Tamron moved production of this lens to China.

My hopes for a better copy were realised. It's a top quality example - great sharpness at all focal lengths at f/2.8. The images produced by the lens are superb. I've never owned Canon "L" glass, so can't compare quality, but I'm really impressed with this Tamron.


Mar 29, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Steve_T2 to your Buddy List  
jimyd
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 23, 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 7
Review Date: Mar 27, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: 2.8,light,sharp as,compact
Cons:
noisier focus than USM

Top lens , excellent price. Build quality could be better..you wouldnt want to kncok this lens too hard against something hard.

Mar 27, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add jimyd to your Buddy List  
mg98
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 24, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Mar 24, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 6 

Pros: Pretty good build quality; relatively fast (when it focusses the first time) and quiet autofocussing
Cons:
Sharpness and contrast less than inexpensive Canon 28mm and 50mm primes; zoom ring has more friction than I expected (maybe loosens up after more usage?); more autofocus "lurking" than with my Canon lenses; not seeing the "pow" of my "L" glass lens.

After reading the reviews of this lens at this site, I was expecting this lens to replace my 28mm f/2.8 and 50mm f/1.8 primes and to rival the Canon 28-70 f/2.8L. Now, I didn't have the Canon 28-70 f/2.8L to compare it to, but I did have the primes. I shot some "newsprint" in a magazine on my front porch from 4-6 feet during the middle of a bright but cloudy day. I set the AF28-75MM at 28mm f/4.0 and 50mm f/4.0 and took 3-4 shots at each setting using my Canon 20D set at raw image capture. I also took 3-4 shots at the same distance with my 28mm prime set at f/4.0 and then my 50mm prime set at f/4.0, also in raw format capture. I handheld the camera, but the shutter speed was around 1/180 sec for all shots, which should minimize problems with camera shake. (I used f/4.0 because it would be a common aperture I'd be using.) I converted all the image files to non-compressed TIFFs and viewed the center (the focus point) of each image at 200% in Photoshop. Here's what I found....the sharpness and contrast of the AF28-75MM was fairly consistently less than either of the primes. The difference between the AF28-75MM and the 28mm prime was smallest (vs. the difference between the AF28-75MM and the 50mm prime), but still noticeable. It was a disappointing result; I really wanted to like the AF28-75MM, but the "pow" just wasn't there. I sent it back in exchange for the Canon 24mm f/2.8. I'll stick with my primes for now (all together, I still paid less than half of the highly touted "L" zoom) until I can make the financial leap to the 24-70mm f/2.8L. I have the Canon 70-200 f/4.0L zoom which beautifully covers 70mm and above (highly recommended!).

Mar 24, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add mg98 to your Buddy List  
panoz7
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 25, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 22
Review Date: Mar 18, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $400.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Price, Image Quality, Size
Cons:
Build, Focus Speed

I just picked up this lens after reading the positive reviews in this forum. I love it. I also considered the sigma 24 - 40 2.8, but my local camera store didn't carry it and my initial impressions of the Tamron at the store were very good. My copy is incredibly sharp, even at 2.8, coming close to the performance of my 50 1.8. The build quality seems pretty good, certainly a step up over the plastic 50, but still not nearly to the level its Canon L counterpart. Focus speed also leaves something to desire compared to Ring USM.

I happily gave up some build quality and focus speed over the 24-70 L in exchange for a lens that, at least in the case of my copy, is optically almost equal and weighs almost a pound less. The $800 I have left in my wallet also probably has something to do with my happiness.






Mar 18, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add panoz7 to your Buddy List  
mikahy
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 27, 2003
Location: Finland
Posts: 11
Review Date: Mar 16, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: sharp,sharp,sharp 2.8 whole zoomrange. light. well built.
Cons:
not canon.

Propably the best lense for the money? The other canditate for this is Canon EF 50/1.8 Prime (Around 100$). This is the lens thats most the time attached to the camera. Not very Wide for 1.6 Crop. But there aint any other to cover the whole are than Crappy 17-85 EF-s lens. If you Dont got Over 1000 or $ to spend on 24-70/2.8 L lens. This is The best lens to go. maybe 96% quality of the L lens Canon does, you could not get A better Deal...

Mar 16, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add mikahy to your Buddy List  
sivrajbm
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Mar 15, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 3267
Review Date: Mar 15, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $359.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Excellent sharpness and contrast @ 4.0 very useable photos @ 2.8. Solid construction, good weight and feel, smooth action, fast focusing. Price verses Canon L series for the same quality photos.
Cons:
Not quite as fast as USM but I haven't missed a shot yet

I bought this lense for my 20D after having used Tamrons before. This is an excellent lense, great color, sharp as a tack.
This is lense makes for a good walk around and low light lense.
After a lot of trials and research of other lenses, "L's" included I bought this lense. You can pay more but it's not going to get much better than this.


Mar 15, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add sivrajbm to your Buddy List  
radphoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 5, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Mar 15, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $369.95 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp! Light, constant f2.8, included lens hood. Did I mention it is sharp? No rotation during focus.
Cons:
Nothing that bothers me...the focusing ring moves during autofocus, but it isn't an issue when its on a tripod or if you hold the lens via the zoom ring, I consider it a non-issue, and it certainly doen't outweigh the sharpness of the lens. Autofocus could be faster, but it isn't too bad at all.

For the price of this lens, you can't go wrong. It is one of the sharpest zooms I've ever used. I'd love to see this quality with a wider zoom range, but nevertheless, it is worth it.

This lens replaced my Canon 17-85 IS zoom, which I wasn't impressed with. Although the zoom range is not nearly as big, the sharpness is much better and my satisfaction is way up.

I use this lens on the Canon 20D.


Mar 15, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add radphoto to your Buddy List  
pookipichu
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 13, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1872
Review Date: Mar 14, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $310.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Lightweight, versatile, sharp, cheap!!!
Cons:
Build quality is not that great. Feel like plastic kit lens 18-55.

This is my little workhorse, always on my camera, studio, outdoor, always fun! Great bokeh, lightweight, close-focusing. Will I ever need any other lens? :-)

Mar 14, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add pookipichu to your Buddy List  
bobbybrown
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 12, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 7
Review Date: Mar 13, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: constant f2.8 a life saver for indoor work @ ISO3200, reasonably quick AF, reasonably wide on digital, long end sufficient for most indoor work but not enough for wildlife work, pretty sharp(i haven't tried USMask yet!), affordable high quality(i paid 170 for mail order return, an absolute bargain!), reasonably good build, metal mount.
Cons:
wide end not quite wide enough for all in one walkabout lense but sufficient for street photography. AF could be a tad quicker.



Mar 13, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add bobbybrown to your Buddy List  
DDPYLS
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 2, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Mar 3, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $319.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Excellent price / image quality / construction. Image quality is very close if not as good as my 24-70 f2.8 L canon. Very small and light weight compared to canon 24-70 L. Performance on 20D is excellent even wide open.
Cons:
Rotating focus ring, minor issue but could be improved. USM motor would be an improvement but still not a big issue.

I've been shooting profesionally for fourty one years and have always bought the best equipment available. I always looked down my nose at independent brands of lenses and have never owned one before. I have seventeen canon lenses that I use with my 1D and 1DsII and was putting together a lighter kit of lenses to go with a 20D attempting to keep weight and size down. I purchased a 28-135 canon lens and have been very disapointed with it. It just isn't sharp at any aperature. So, I was looking for a small light weight substitute for the 28-135 when my dealer suggested the Tamron 28-75. I was reluctant to even test it but finally dit along with the canon 24-85mm. I shot side by side the canon 28-135, canon 24-85 and the Tamron 27-85. When I got back to my studio and revied my raw files I was absolutely floored at the image quality of the Tamron. The canon 24-85 was slightly better than my 28-135 but the Tamron was far superior to the other two. It was even better wide open than either of the canons at their best aperature, much better. I haven't tested it on the 1DsII yet but feel it will be a stellar performer on it aswell. On the 20D the Tamron compares favorably with my 24-70L canon and probably equals it in image quality. There's no question the L canon lenses are heavier built but light weight and high image quality is what I wanted and got. The lens does seem to be constructed very well and I would expect it to hold up under normal use with no problems for many years. Even if it does break Tamron has a six year warranty and even disregarding the warranty the lens is so cheap that purchasing a replacement is no big deal.

Mar 3, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add DDPYLS to your Buddy List  
film-digi
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 2, 2005
Location: China
Posts: 0
Review Date: Mar 2, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: $350.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: *sharp as pro lens,small portable hood,price and performence,build quality is also good enough
Cons:
*color is warm compare with canon one (i think consider the price color tone is the only cons)

in fact the image quality like sharpness ,saturation is not in the same street with canon 28-135 (i had used one);
even though after 4 month bought it i sold this lens ,why?
the reason is simple,i don't like it's warm color ,especialy for skin , on my new eos 3 ,i doubt if the camera underexpoure ,instead i bought secondhand canon 28-70, the result is superb,the color is vivid.even the secondhand lens price is double than tamron 28-75,but i think it worth .






Mar 2, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add film-digi to your Buddy List  
warren
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 5, 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 14
Review Date: Feb 25, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: * Very, very sharp even wide open. * Did I say it was SHARP??? * CHEAP for the quality of image it produces * great bokeh- buttery smooth * Compact and lightweight * Good build quality- not "L" class but very robust, metal * Hood included
Cons:
* So-so AF (not a patch on Canon USM) * No full time Manual Focus tweaking * Barrel extends a long way (but then it's smaller than the 24-70L) * AF ring rotates while focusing (don't hold onto it!) * Bundled hood is very basic plastic affair. Does the job I guess

Basically a 24-70L at a quarter of the price, with slower AF (still decent but not USM lightning fast) and not built like a tank. Otherwise almost as good- VERY SHARP and good build quality. Fantastic images, highly recommended. Oh, and it's much smaller and lighter too which for some (many?) people is a distinct advantage esp. for candid or street photography where you don't want a massive white L lens announcing your presence...

Heaps of example photos online in galleries at www.wprasek.com/photos

or via www.wprasek.com

=================
warren prasek
www.wprasek.com


Feb 25, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add warren to your Buddy List  
Qwntm
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 31, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 303
Review Date: Feb 20, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $250.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Image Quality, Price, Weight, Size, in that order.
Cons:
Not USM focusing, Focus ring turns, No FTM focusing, lens extends while focusing.

The Image Quality is Canon L quality. That combined with the weight and size made it a must try lens. I try to stick to OEM lenses, but the Canon offering was too big and too heavy. For the price of this lens, I figured why not give it a try. Up against my SUPERB 17-40L, this lens is just about equal in terms of image quality. (I wish Canon would come out with a 17-55 2.8 EF-S L lens!)

Build quality is very high quality for it's price range, it competes with Canon's mid level, i.e. 24-85 USM. The Canon lens may handle better with USM and FTM focusing, but the Image Quality of the Tamron is L quality, so the trade off as I see it is sacrifice a little handleing smoothness for a 2.8 lens with L image quality. OK, fair enough...

This lens is so good, I wish I had tried the 17-35 2.8-4.0 before I bought the 17-40L.


Feb 20, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Qwntm to your Buddy List  
thereedeffect
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 17, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 55
Review Date: Feb 13, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $360.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Fast constant aperature, sharp wide open and very sharp stopped down a bit, perfect size/weight, good build, manual focus ring functions very smoothly, focus is accurate, included hood fits securely, 7 diaphragm blades make for very pleasing bokeh, close-focusing, zoom lock very useful, oh... and don't forget the price
Cons:
Nitpicking only! - Zoom ring isn't the smoothest... may take getting used to, focusing isn't very fast and seemingly inefficient as the ring spins while focusing. Those are my only annoyances in my past couple weeks' experience with this wonderful little piece of engineering.

I'm glad I was broke for long enough to really research my needs and reevaluate my options for a standard zoom to replace my EF-S 18-55. This lens has been the PERFECT companion to my 300D body and my shooting style. I found that with the 18-55, I was using the 30-55 range mostly and almost always wanting a little longer. I was also tired of its cheap, weightless feel and having to stop down to F8 for a sharp image. If I had to do it again, I wouldn't hesitate to make the same decision.


Just to be fair, the Sigma 24-70mm EX DG MACRO is worth checking out if you think you might need a tad more on the wide end. It's a little bigger, heavier, and more expensive, but I've heard from several that it's also extremely sharp.


Feb 13, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add thereedeffect to your Buddy List  
Persian-Rice
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 29, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 73
Review Date: Feb 6, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $369.95 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Price, fast(aperture), very sharp at f4+, size & weight, nice bokeh.
Cons:
Build is not great, prone to Man. defects, slightly soft wide open, slow focus.

One of the best bang-for-the-buck lenses out there.

My most major concern came true, TWICE. The lens had image performance problems. First, the DOF was messed up, shallow depth on left half of the image, deep on the right.
Second lens was exteremly soft at 75mm(all apertures) and wide-open everywhere else.

Thrid lens is good, not tack sharp wide-open but good. At f4 and above the lens is stunning. Contrast could be better but nothing that cant be fixed in PS.

The lens has a very nice feel to it, especially in terms of size & weight, but it still is very plasticy.

Focusing is smooth but slow. Hood clips on real tight, better then my L lenses. The center squeeze cap is also very convenient.

No one will complain about the price tag. I also don't care that it doesnt have FTM. IMO at this price, beggers can't be choosers

Overall, I reccomend this lens, but try to buy it in person so you can test it out.


Feb 6, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Persian-Rice to your Buddy List  




Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 XR Di Zoom AF

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
175 339621 Jun 16, 2010
Recommended By Average Price
85% of reviewers $357.83
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
7.96
9.21
8.6
28-75mm


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11>  next