 |
|
|
Andythaler
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 15, 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Jun 14, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
- Very good bokeh
- very sharp at f/2.8, tack sharp from f/3.5 onwards
- constant f/2.8
- lens hood included
- 67 mm filters (same as 70-200/4.0)
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
NOTE: THIS IS THE SAME LENS AS THE 'OTHER' TAMRON 28-75/2.8 XR DI.
THERE IS ONLY ONE MODEL AVAILABLE.
VERY GOOD BOKEH (important for portraits), better than Sigma and Tokina 24-70/2.8 lenses from the comparison images I have seen. A LOT better than EF 50/1.8!
My copy is very sharp at f/2.8, and tack sharp from f/3.5 onwards.
(Tack sharp means sharp when viewed at 100% crop on my 20D images without USM.)
Very light and small for a constant f/2.8 lens, the lens hood is included.
'Pinch style' Lens cap can be opened and closed with mounted lens hood without breaking your fingers.
|
|
 Jun 14, 2005
|
|
Chris39
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 29, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 11
|
|
Review Date: Jun 10, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Accurate AF, good contrast, reasonalbe CA
|
|
Cons:
|
Tamron color, 67mm filter
|
|
|
Compare to Canon 24-70 f2.8 (Canon)Tamron is a winner for his accurate AF, price and CA controlling. For color and contrast Canon is better. When wide open the peripheral area lack of sharpness but is is common even for Canon. So after trying Canon first I would accept this. I found better AF accuracy compared with Canon. The reason maybe it is designed later than Canon so more compatable with new canon bodies.
The weak point of this lens is its color. It could be explained by the price difference. Also it is not weather proof. I did not find MTF of Tamron lens, which makes me a little bit concern about its resolution.
For f2.8 this lens is a good choice. I would suggest try custom WB when you shoot with this lens.
|
|
|
Jun 10, 2005
|
|
Ostwind
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 23, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5
|
|
Review Date: Jun 5, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $330.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp overall, great close-up performance, fast, easy to focus, great flare reduction.
I think it is a real bargain, a great performance/cost ratio!
|
|
Cons:
|
None really. Minor points: no USM, but the autofocus is fast and reasonably quiet. Yes the focus ring goes the "wrong" way.
|
|
|
I use it on digital and film Canon bodies.
|
|
|
Jun 5, 2005
|
|
RCicala
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jan 9, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2513
|
|
Review Date: Apr 25, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $335.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
small, inexpensive, sharp, fast - what's not to like?
|
|
Cons:
|
backwards zoom ring
|
|
|
Easy to carry, fast and very sharp. Autofocus is accurate, if its slow I haven't noticed it. Great images - sharp even wide open with good color. Manual focus works well once you get used to the reverse ring.
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2005
|
|
luciora
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 12, 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 24, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, light, fast. no vignetting, distorsion, chromatic abberations even wide open. quite affordable, too.
|
|
Cons:
|
no usm, starts at 28mm.
|
|
|
now THIS is a great lens. when i bought this i sold 2 of my primes and the sigma 18-125 because the little tamron here is faster, lighter and sharper than all the other lenses i've had. okay, it's not an 'L', but it's quite cheap - i paid ~350€ for it, brand new.
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2005
|
|
vabra
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 23, 2005
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 16, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $370.00
| Rating: 1
|
|
Pros:
|
None for the piece I get from Adorama
|
|
Cons:
|
Significantly softer then the cheapest Canon kit lens
|
|
|
Based on the excelent reviews across the net I decided for that lens. Unfortunately the Qality Control of Tamron clearly failed. The pictures in all apertures are significantly worse then from the $60 Canon kit lens. Hardly usable for the speed above F16. Unfortunately I bought it in during my brothers visit of US (using him as "messenger" - I'm living at the middle of Europe - Prague) so the return/fix process will be more complicated, if possible.
European Tamron headqurter, where I send the mail asking fix is not answering. Any hint? Please mail me to pva(at)centrum(dot)cz
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2005
|
|
horriss
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 28, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 171
|
|
Review Date: Apr 15, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Image quality, 2.8, size
|
|
Cons:
|
zoom ring goes the wrong way!
|
|
|
Hard to fault, really. Yes, the focus is a bit slower and a bit louder than the canon USM, but only a bit. No, its not an L quality build, but its one of the best non L lenses I've used (better than the non L canon stuff I've got). The image quality is really, really good. Its sharp right down to 2.8.
If only the zoom ring went the same way as my L's it would be perfect for a non-city walkabout lens (not quite wide enough for cityscapes or landscapes)
pleasantly surprised and its not going back!
|
|
|
Apr 15, 2005
|
|
nottageek
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 24, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 589
|
|
Review Date: Apr 14, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $330.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, well made, has a zoom lock. Excellent sharpness, contrast and colour. Remarkably light, small and cheap compared to it's main rival the 24-70L. Comparable optical performance for one third the cost.
|
|
Cons:
|
No full time manual focussing.
|
|
|
I've been delighted with the performance of this lens. It stays on my camera 90% of the time. Perfect walk around city lens.
|
|
|
Apr 14, 2005
|
|
donutley
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 28, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 404
|
|
Review Date: Mar 29, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great pics. No limitations at all in picture quality. Light and well-made for the price. A genuine bargain!
|
|
Cons:
|
The lens extends as it zooms. Sometimes very noticable.
|
|
|
I've used this little gem as my go-to lens for almost nine months. I've never been disappointed or felt limited at all by the build quality or results. It's light, durable and the picture quality lives up to every glowing review I've ever read.
My satisfaction with this lens led me to also purchase the 17-35mm f/2.8-4 and I have been very pleased with both. (I tried the Canon L equivalent for several days, but having lived with the Tamron 28-75, I quickly realized that the Canon was not superior in image quality, so I returned it, bought the Tamron and enjoyed the $300 savings!)
Yes, if I were a pro, I would probably need what the L-quality lenses bring to the table. But, both of the Tamron "tools" are a joy to use--and I enjoy the feeling of cashing in on two real bargains!
|
|
|
Mar 29, 2005
|
|
CurtPick
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Nov 21, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3260
|
|
Review Date: Mar 21, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $265.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great Build quality. Great sharp and contrasty pictures. LOve the size and feel.
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
Bough this Gem brand new. I have to say I am very pleased with its performance. The picture is very sharp and very nice color rendition. The contrast is wonderful. The bokeh is unsurpassed even in the canon L lens series. You cant beat the price and you cant beat a 6 year warranty ! Tamron made this one right , straight out of the box !
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2005
|
|
inaz4sun
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 7, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 28
|
|
Review Date: Mar 15, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $304.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality, lens hood, sharpness, flexibility.
|
|
Cons:
|
None yet
|
|
Well my first take on this lens is all positive. The proof is in the pudding as they say:
http://www.view2az.com/arizona/march/index.html
Some early shots with it. I think it will be a great multipurpose lens, people shots, etc...
The lens hood is nice, can be mounted on the camera when not in use. Zoom feels good.
|
|
|
Mar 15, 2005
|
|
bobbybrown
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 12, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 7
|
|
Review Date: Mar 8, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Good sharpness, Price, Constant f2.8, Lightweight, Good build, Reasonable filter diameter, Decent walkabout focal length range.
|
|
Cons:
|
Slightly slower than 28-135IS USM at low light AF, not waterproofed, no FTM
|
|
|
Optics arguably comparable to LUSM
Focus speed is typical Tamron, ie not quite USM
Focus is not FTM, so try not to think it is and slip the clutch to much.
Filter is not 77mm like most ultra-wides so a little pain to buy an adaptor.
Focus at telephoto(if you can call 70mm tele) is not working that well on mine especially in low light and low contrast, which could be due to the camera AF. Perhaps i should get it checked.
Build quality is good, its probably lighter than Canon pro so the more likely it'll stay on my camera.
The wide end is about 75% of a 19mm so it might be worth getting prime ultra-wides for your DSLRs and keep this little wonder on most of the time.
Beware though, Tamron lense seems to take a lot of power from my 10D, and USM have reportedly been hacking less juice out of the old camcorder power pack.
|
|
|
Mar 8, 2005
|
|
GungaDin
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 24, 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Feb 26, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
price : performance ratio, fast, tack-sharp, solidly built
|
|
Cons:
|
AF a tad slower and louder than Canon USM
|
|
|
I have used this lens now for a couple of days and I can say it's a keeper. Yes, building a zoom that's not too wide spread (only 28mm to 75mm) isn't exactly 'rocket science', but this lens is a great performer, though. Color cast is fairly neutral, centre sharpness is amazing even fully opened (f/2.8), corner sharpness improves when stopped down to f/4, contrast is great. AF Works flawlessly on my dRebel and the 20D even under adverse lighting conditions. A real bargain.
|
|
|
Feb 26, 2005
|
|
impactfoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 24, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 5
|
|
Review Date: Feb 24, 2005
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $369.00
| Rating: 3
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, size+weight, nice zoom range, good focus performance in good light.
|
|
Cons:
|
AWFUL at 4.0 and greater apertures, focus hunts in low light, lens extends when zooming, a little plasticky finish...
|
|
|
Maybe I got a bad copy, but this one is going back tomorrow. Right side of frame is signifigantly blurrier than the left, and the right side is the top when I shoot vertically, so that's the focus point I was using!
Unusably soft at 2.8. If I can't shoot at 2.8, why pay for a 2.8 lens? Plus, I tend to shoot on the fly, and KNOW that I won't always remember not to open up the lens.
Got to try a friend's Nikkor 24-85 2.8-4 over the weekend... FAR superior... wish I'd noticed this one in the lineup before I 'gambled' on the Tamron. Not only do you get more zoom range on both ends (making a better general purpose 'walkaround' lens), it's the 'genuine article'. Sure, you 'lose a stop' on the long end, but since you can't shoot the Tamron at 2.8 anyway, what's the difference? And at only a couple hundred more than the Tamron, it's not like agonizing over the $1000+ difference comparing to the AF-S.
|
|
|
Feb 24, 2005
|
|
JCMILLAR
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 22, 2005
Location: Thailand
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Feb 22, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent lens. Very very sharp and the colour is super. It is not light and not really heavy just enough weight to feel like quality. I ordered this lens and had to wait several weeks for delivery. In the interim I splurged and bought the EF 17-40 f4/ L. This was to replace the EF-S 28 - 55mm that came with my 20D. What a difference. I quickly got the " L " attitude. Love this lens.
The Tamron is super just out of the box the sharpness of the image and the colour jumps out. It certainly has a place in the bag with " L " Glass.
It is well built has a nice weight and good balance on the 20D.
|
|
Cons:
|
None to date
|
|
|
I did a lot or reading before buying my 20D and passed the Rebel knowing something better was on the way. I love everything about the 20D. The EF-S 28 - 55 mm lens that comes with the camera is another story. I am glad I never paid extra for the EF-S 28 - 75 mm.
I bought this lens as a replacement for the EF-S after reading all the reviews on the other Tamron 28-75 mm lens at this my favorite site. Perfection.
While I waited for this lens I splurged and bought the EF 17-40 f/4 L,USM and have used it for three weeks. Great lens.
If you buy this Tamron you will also have a great lens.
The build and over all quality of the " L " glass is the greatest. You get what you pay for. This Tamron is a bargain get one, you will be a happy camper.
Now I ponder between the Sigma and the EF 70-200 f/2.8 L, USM. Is the Canon worth the money. To date my marketing search and information from people like you all, have be convinced that it is.
As I have learned here and there any lens with a 4 rating or better is sure to satisify the amature who wants to be a pro.
Thank you all for your help. For the low price of this Tamron you need to get one, it is a new class way above the EF-S crap that Canon is putting out. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
121
|
233859
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
