about | support
home
 

Search Used

Tamron 28-75MM F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
121 252601 May 2, 2012
Recommended By Average Price
90% of reviewers $346.76
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
8.04
9.53
8.8
2875mm

Specifications:
Di: Digitally Integrated Design, is a designation Tamron puts on lenses featuring optical systems designed to meet the performance characteristics of digital SLR cameras.



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.

Model A09
Lens Construction (Groups/Elements) 14/16
Angle of View 75-32
Type of Zooming Rotation
Diaphragm Blade Number 7
Minimum Aperture F/32
Minimum Focus 0.33m (13") (entire zoom range)
Macro Mag. Ratio 1:3.9 (at 75mm)
Filter Diameter 67
Weight 510g (18.0oz.)
Diameter x Length 73mmx 92mm
(2.9in x 3.6in)
Accessory Lens hood
Mount Canon, Minolta, Nikon-D, Pentax


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8  next
      
saxologist
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 9, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 21
Review Date: Jul 12, 2009 Recommend? | Price paid: Not Indicated

Pros: Love the weight and nice feel Lens cap awesome (pinch type) color contrast!
Cons:
manual focus ring spins worst thing

Update: I have owned the lens and shot it now for several months. I used it indoors (auditorium) and many outdoors. The lens continues to amaze me with the IQ and color contrast. Love the 2.8 and Bokeh! So far no issues. Tack sharp! I don't use my other much anymore except when needing far reach (70-200 f4 ISL). I received confirmation from Tamron that I am now registered and have a warranty number, and got a pin from them. Love the front lens cap...
No problems thus far with hunting or lens creep.
I am thinking of trying the 17-50 tammy....would trade my 17-85 canon anytime...
I still believe this to be a steal of a lens!


Jul 12, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add saxologist to your Buddy List  
saxologist
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 9, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 21
Review Date: Jun 4, 2009 Recommend? | Price paid: $370.00

Pros: light, great optics. Focus reasonably fast. Great contrast. 67mm filters A steal when you price this. 2.8 F stop....
Cons:
focus ring turns (be careful). Build better than middle grade Canon (17-85).

Comparing to my 17-85 IS. The focus is very good and the optics are better than 17-85. I rented 24-70L and was nice but too heavy and bulky. The optics on this lens are very close. I shot my daughters graduation with my 580exII and was very pleased with all shots but maybe one shot when in motion. The focus motor is fast but make more noise than USM. All in all I believe this is a steal. I also focus tested it when I bought it and it seems dead on, no complaints of image issues in any quadrants. I believe the QC has caught up and is fine. I am now considering 17-50 2.8 as an option. I am happy not having my L glass on during some shoots since its may get banged or dinged. I am pleased to have this on. My 70-200 f4 IS is still superior but not 3x the cost or image quality. I am now selling my 17-85. I highly recommend this lens (D40 here). For the L equivalent I am not prepared to lay down close to 1K. Next lens to consider is tokina 11-16, or 12-24(a steal as well). I hope this review helps others out there like me (hobbyist and occasionally published). 3rd party glass is worth a look. Oh yes 6yr US warranty, and 30day trial of lens(amazon)


Jun 4, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add saxologist to your Buddy List  
saxologist
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 9, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 21
Review Date: May 30, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $370.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Build OK better than expected. Color and sharpness thus far very good. I tested it against focus chart at 2.8 and well focused so QC must be there. I believe this is a steal for the optics and the performance. I own L lenses as well and can't keep buying these beasts without breaking the bank...I was concerned but pricing was too good to be true. 30days to further investigate (Amazon)
Cons:
focus ring turns so be careful.

Great...great....great. I rented the 24-70L and was too heavy and IQ no better. Slightly faster focus but this is tack sharp..even 2.8 as tested today. I read many reviews....17-50 and 28-75 stand out as best buys and seem to beat more expensive alternatives....6yr warranty....we will see.

May 30, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add saxologist to your Buddy List  
Chococat
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 26, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 171
Review Date: Jan 30, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $389.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: It gets the job done effectively--bottom line, that's the best you can hope for, right?
Cons:
Build quality is average, not great (but not bad, either--it's sturdy enough); admittedly the autofocus motor is not super fast.

I think this is a very good lens. Now, as context, understand that statement comes from a guy who had pretty much given up on zooms a long while back, has in fact largely given up on Canon's own lenses and has been using Zeiss primes, and returned the only other Tamron product he ever bought within 6 hours. So for me to state that I think it is good, well it means I'm impressed.

I bought this recently because I wanted a zoom to take with me on a trip to South America, and didn't want to spend too much because I wasn't sure whether I would want to keep using a zoom. I chose this one because it seemed to have a decent reputation for a reasonably priced consumer zoom. I find the results to be very good in all aspects--sharpness, color, corners, etc. I think it's strength is on the wide end. At 28mm even the corners on my copy hold together well (and that's on a full frame 5d II) and the center sharpness is great--honestly, this is better at 28mm than some of the lousy primes I have owned.

If you are a Canon shooter, there is always the inevitable comparison with the 24-70L, and quality vs. price, etc. Yes, I am a person who has owned the 24-70L. I am also one of the people who found it to be a major dissappointment. In fact, the 24-70L is pretty much the reason I gave up on zooms in the end--on a full frame I found the corners to be dreadful, and I found even the cheap primes to be an improvement. I honestly, sincerely think the copy of the Tamron that I have is better than that copy of the 24-70L--if the guy I sold it to offered to trade, I would say no. So in my opinion, based on my copy, I don't just think this is a better lens "for the price," I think it is simply a better lens. Obviously, there is the issue of sample variation--it is certainly possible (and I have always assumed) that I had a lousy copy of the 24-70L (of course, when someone pays $1200 for a lens, there is no excuse of sticking them with a lousy copy . . . ), and I might also have a great copy of the Tamron. Even if that is so, I can only assume that an average copy of the Tamron 28-75 is still a pretty good lens. Obviously, the L lens is built better and is faster, so if those are major concerns to you than you need the L lens, but if you are just interested in image qualities, I strongly recommend you take a look at the Tamron.

Regarding sample variation, since I had heard some conflicting reviews on this lens, when I went to the store to buy it I asked the clerk to bring all the copies he had out to me so I could test them and choose the one I wanted (the clerk knows me, and humors my eccentricities). I think that was a good move, because I did sincerely believe from looking at the images that the copy I chose was a tad better. Well, and obviously I feel I am getting very good results, so as it turned out I did pick a good copy. That's my one bit of advice for anyone buying a mass market, consumer type lens like this (or any lens, really)--copies can be different, and if you have the chance, don't just take the one the clerk hands you, ask to try multiple copies to see if there is one that might be better.


Jan 30, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Chococat to your Buddy List  
bocaminus
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Apr 19, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 515
Review Date: Dec 10, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $280.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Weight, sharpness and build
Cons:
None so far

I know many will disagree but this lens performs better than my 24-70L. Beside being lighter than a "brick", Tamron really shines in all aspects. The sharpness and color matching is absolutely fantastic. I have to say I didn't expect much from it but after few days of shooting and testing, IMO the lens outperforms many Canon L zoom counterparts. 67mm filter size on this lens in compassion to 72mm on 24-70L will save you even more $$$.

Dec 10, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add bocaminus to your Buddy List  
gwaww
Online
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 20, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 425
Review Date: Dec 1, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $365.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Price, light weight, very sharp (see comments)
Cons:
Had to get 3 before I got a good one.

Third times the charm. I had to get 3 of these to get a good one, but now it is stuck to my 5D. I get very sharp images with this one. Fist one soft, second one vignettes on lower left and upper right corners (???????), third one spectacular!!

Dec 1, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add gwaww to your Buddy List  
Whitesmith
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 30, 2008
Location: Philippines
Posts: 0
Review Date: Nov 30, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp , Cheap, Usable range, fast 2.8
Cons:
AF is noisy but can't complain for the price. Tendency to suck dust but I think it's pretty normal for this kind of lens.

This is really a value for money. If you're budget is limited and looking for a decent all around/portrait lens, then look no further. My copy is very sharp wide open, nice contrast/saturation, and may not have the best bokeh around but has very decent quality.

If you need wider lens, then his brother 17-50 2.8 is another state of the art lens to check out and own.

However, if budget is not an issue, I'll think twice in getting 3rd party lenses.

On the other hand, being practical and the fact that I'm just a pure hobbyist... Tamron 28-75 2.8 or 17-50 2.8 is really one of the best thing that happened to camera world. I'm very happy to own and use one.

Highly recommended!!!


Nov 30, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Whitesmith to your Buddy List  
Sandeep Singh
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 9, 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 14
Review Date: Oct 19, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $300.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Sharp at 2.8, light weight, macro
Cons:
Slow Noisy Autofocus, build quality, Glare,

After a lot of research and reading reviews I found this lens perfect for everyday needs I had. But may be either I had over expectations from reviews or nice photos from this lens, I wasnt impressed with poor color reproduction , slow noisy auto focus and no so sharp sharpness. But I was comparing it to wrong lens - 50 f/1.8 . AF, contrast, sharpness was not as good as compared to 50 f/1.8 At times photos would come good , at times they would be useless completely. I then borrowed my friend's canon 28-70 and compared photos side by side. 28-70 is built like a tank but it's AF weakness was revealed when I was snapping my 1 yr old son running around. tamron proved better in AF. It fares very well as macro, better than canon, MFD being only .33 m, which is very useful for me.
Canon hunted no less than tamron in dimly lighted areas. I might be wrong but 77mm thread should have been more useful.
at f/2.8 both lenses are same sharp at f/4 tamron shines marginally, at f/8 tamron is still leading.
Overall this is an f/4 lens. not that 2.8 is not usable but needs PP. Lastly doesnt look like a Professional lens but its the photos that matter.

Disclaimer: I am not a 'pro'


Oct 19, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Sandeep Singh to your Buddy List  
skibum5
Online
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 20, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 16616
Review Date: Oct 13, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $260.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: amazingly sharp, nothing beats it in this range corner to corner, very compact
Cons:
super slow AF, contrast a trace low compared to the best lenses

if it had a tad more contrast and faster AF nothing could touch it, the AF is almost absurdly slow at times though, aside from these two aspects ti would put the 24-70L to shame for incredibly less money

build is perfectly serviceable although nothing to write home about by any means but it's not like it will fall apart so it doesn't matter in the end.


Oct 13, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add skibum5 to your Buddy List  
skyarrow1
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 24, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 13
Review Date: Aug 25, 2008 Recommend? no | Price paid: $350.00 | Rating: 6 

Pros: Does take sharp photos, it is light and good price.
Cons:
Will not last in the long run. I have had 3 of these and all 3 stop working with focus issues. I am a professional photographer and they just cannot handle the strain of daily use.



Aug 25, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add skyarrow1 to your Buddy List  
richardjones
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 24, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Aug 24, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Lightweight & amazingly sharp with good colour.
Cons:
Absolutely nothing

I have recently made the jump from the Canon 30D to the Canon 5D and was a bit stuck as to which lens to get for my weddings. I realised after getting the Canon 5D that a lot of lenses didn't fit like they did on the 30D which made it difficult to choose a suitable lens without it costing ther earth. I considered the L series canon lens - 24-70mm F2.8L but it was well over 600.00 and I wasn't sure about its size and weight - likewise with the Sigma equivalent there had been mixed reviews and onse I saw it and tried it at a shop I didn't like it at all - very bulky and the zoom ring was in a strange place on the lens. Then I found out about the Tamron equivalent and at well below 400 it seemed like a contender. I read some reviews and decided to go for it. This is a great lens. It's really sharp all the way through on my 5D - colour is great and even better - it's lightweight! F2.8 all the way through means that i'm not constantly fiddling with the controls on my camera (I use manual mode all the time) - I could not ask for a better lens. Don't hesitate - just buy one!

Aug 24, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add richardjones to your Buddy List  
photo77
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 18, 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jun 18, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Colours, surprisingly sharp at 2.8, excellent sharpness when stopped down, contrast, price
Cons:
If any- extending zoom, but this is actually not a problem for me; also, sometimes (very rarely though) the focus hunts in low light

I bought this lens second hand for only 179 EUR for my EOS 30D, but even without considering this fact, the Tamron 28-75 2.8 is one of the best things I've purchased recently. I don't know whether there are quality issues with this lens, but my copy is tack sharp when stopped down and even at 2.8 the sharpness is next to excellent. And all this even when I use an UV filter. I have used several zoom lenses in the 24-90 region (non-L) and although I am not a specialist I can see that Tamron is better than them (these include also the EF 28-135 IS), because I know what sharp means from the EF 50mm 1.8 and some russian lenses like Helios 58mm 2. The pictures are very contrast, with saturated yet natural colours. The bokeh at 75 mm 2.8 is wonderful and this on par with the close focusing abilities of this lens is what I like most. The build quality is quite decent and I don't really mind the extending zoom. Maybe the Canon EF L lenses in this zoom region are better, maybe not - I don't know, but now when I have the Tamron I don't feel like I want to buy any of them - this little monster serves me quite well. Highly recommended !!!

Jun 18, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add photo77 to your Buddy List  
sanja
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 10, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 4
Review Date: Jun 3, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: sharp, particularly in the center; small
Cons:
plastic, but this does make it light

In 2006 I compared two lenses from my arsenal: (1) a $319 Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di autofocus (for Canon); and (2) a $1,299 Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM autofocus lens. Though I didn't compare images at their edges, I didn't have to carefully compare them at their center: the Tamron was decidedly sharper. In light of this test, I sent my EF 24-70 to Canon for a tune-up. On receiving it back, I compared the lenses again -- and again, the Tamron won. See http://lubowphotography.com/tamron-canon-test.htm
I shelved the EF24-70, now park a Canon EF 24-105 F.4 on my camera, and turn to the Tamron 28-75 when I need the speed.
My guess is, the EF24-70 was simply a lemon. In any event, for the price, the Tamron 25-75 may be the best value of any lens out there.


Jun 3, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add sanja to your Buddy List  
kevindar
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 6, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2450
Review Date: May 7, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: weight, center sharpness through out range. close focusing distance, value
Cons:
corner sharpness full frame between 28-50. Low light focusing, focusing speed.

I have had this lens for 3 years with extensive use. I have also recently purchased the canon 28-70 2.8L, and own the 24-105. On my 5D, the center sharpness is very similar, with Tamron at times exceeding canon. The corner sharpness of tamron is far behind canon, which is amazingly sharp in the corners wide open. somewhere between 5.6 and 8, the tamron becomes very sharp.
Focusing speed is good, not as quick as the canon. Color and contrast is slightly better on canon, as is distortion on the wide end and lateral chromatic aberration. All that said, tamron is an unbelievable value. On a cropped sensor it makes a killer portrait lens, and you dont have to worry much about the soft corners. It also has very close focusing distance, which is very nice to have.


May 7, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add kevindar to your Buddy List  
lextalionis
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 28, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 1076
Review Date: Mar 28, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $355.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Very good lens at a very good price. Good size and weight (smaller than Canon's equivalent).
Cons:
Not built as sturdy as Canon's equivalent.

Pros: Very good lens at a very good price. Good size and weight (smaller than Canon's equivalent).

Cons:
Not built as sturdy as Canon's equivalent.

Sample Photos Taken with a Canon 300D

-Roy


Mar 28, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add lextalionis to your Buddy List  
slyb
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 20, 2008
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 0
Review Date: Mar 25, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $360.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: colors
Cons:
very soft at 2.8, slow focusing (acceptable), hunts in low light

This lens is a dilemma!
There are enough things I dislike not to use it...but I simply cannot get rid of it.

Mine is far too soft at 2.8. I need 2 steps up to get proper sharpness.
Alright now if you have stepped up...it focuses a bit slow (quite normal for 3rd party lens) and hunts badly in low light.

but then...the colors...the best colors I get on my 30D are with that Tamron lens. No other lens (and I insist on this point), including my canon primes, give me such colors. That's the only reason why I am keeping it in my system.

Good 'general purpose' lens, especially on travel...


Mar 25, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add slyb to your Buddy List  




Tamron 28-75MM F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
121 252601 May 2, 2012
Recommended By Average Price
90% of reviewers $346.76
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
8.04
9.53
8.8
2875mm


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8  next