Don't own the Nikor lens but my trusted dealer told me that both lenses are equal in terms of IQ. The price of the Tamron is approx. 40 % lower and the lens has an IS which the Nikon don't have.
I didn't find the detail to be so impressive on the crop (I've been spoiled by medium format digital) but the shot is fabulous, and that's what really counts.
jhinkey wrote:
Sure here you go. Unsharpened straight out of NX2.
John
Hope you don't mind the constructive criticism but there's something very wrong going on there. Whether it's the lens or missed focus I don't know but you should be getting a lot more detail than that.
Graham Mitchell wrote:
Hope you don't mind the constructive criticism but there's something very wrong going on there. Whether it's the lens or missed focus I don't know but you should be getting a lot more detail than that.
Eh, it's probably just due to it being far away/atmosphere in the way.
woos wrote:
Eh, it's probably just due to it being far away/atmosphere in the way.
Well, it's at f/8 (a bit of diffraction kicking in), handheld, a few miles of atmosphere on a very very windy day, and at 35mm which is the weakest FL of the 17-35/2.8 AFS. No sharpening. I'm pretty happy with it.
John
EDIT: Also, it has a CPL on it which, in my experience, takes some sharpness away, AND it's at 1/50 sec, which is a tad too slow for sharp hand holding (at least for me I need 1/(2xFL) shutter speeds). Still very happy with the sharpness though.
EDIT #2: Also never do I mind constructive criticism!
Rolf
