p.37 #1 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Jannik Peters wrote:
I just updated the review and put my statement a little into perspective - "The build quality is comparable to the Sony 3.5-5.6/28-70 OSS, maybe even a tad below that. That means that the lens is well assembled and without play in the focus/zoom rings but without the fancy and sturdy impression of the other available FE-lenses. The lens barrel is made of plastic and the focus and zoom rings are rubberized. The lens mount is made of metal and has a rubber gasket".
My criticism about the burr and the joint remains. Other manufacturers do that much better, why shouldn't I mention that?
While i would certainly agree the build quality is not in the same range as the G master, I would strongly disagree with the build being in line with the kit lens. The Kit lens is really a POS. Extend it all the way and it wobbles etc. The tamaron is pretty well made for a sony lens. I would say it is just as well made as most of the sony lenses that are not G or G master. Consideiring the price, this seems like a pretty good mix. I am am happy with the idea of not using metal. Plastic has weaknesses but so does metal. Metal tends to last longer but can contract and expand with temperature. It can create problems with humidity/fungus etc. I would not hate on a lens just because they use a lot of thermoplastic. It is like complaingin about the location of the focus ring. I may hate it but i am sure someone out there loves it. By the same token, your corner analysis is good and fair but close and far focus can give different results AND it may or may not be impacted by a funky focal volume. I can less about the extreme corner than the sides of the frame. If i want corner to corner sharpness I am NOT going to shoot an 800$ zoom.....
p.37 #2 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Apparently people are emotionally attached to this being a great lens. Thanks for the review/impressions, Jannik. Sounds like exactly what I need/want.
p.37 #3 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Great review Jannik, finally had a chance to read it all the way through. I think your comment in the Pros/Cons section summed it up perfectly, it’s Entry Level build, nothing to do with plastic per se, but could have been finished better. Great stuff with the bokeh too. I’d seen strange differences but hadn’t gotten a chance to evaluate.
One thing I found, if you use the existing ACR profile for the older lenses, it seems to cure vignette perfectly. Otherwise you can enable the correction in camera and it’s seems much cleaner.
Anyway it’s funny, people seem to want A full GM replacemtbat 1/3 the cost without compromise... I’m with you, your use case seems to be what this lens is made for and why I bought it, though it stands in fine for stuff like landscape if the focal length works.
Keep up the good work.
Jannik Peters wrote:
I just updated the review and put my statement a little into perspective - "The build quality is comparable to the Sony 3.5-5.6/28-70 OSS, maybe even a tad below that. That means that the lens is well assembled and without play in the focus/zoom rings but without the fancy and sturdy impression of the other available FE-lenses. The lens barrel is made of plastic and the focus and zoom rings are rubberized. The lens mount is made of metal and has a rubber gasket".
My criticism about the burr and the joint remains. Other manufacturers do that much better, why shouldn't I mention that?
p.37 #4 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Wow, I am surprised about the people who are trying to discredit my findings here, especially users with just a few posts who have contributed nothing but that so far.
People should know by now that we always try to be as honest as possible and give our readers an exact impression of what to expect. I can understand that a honest opinion causes some disappointed expectations or justifications of purchases and but I didn't experience that here.. So far FM members were always able to stand the truth Especially in a case where I even say that I like and keep a lens.
p.37 #5 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Jannik Peters wrote:
Wow, I am surprised about the people who are trying to discredit my findings here, especially users with just a few posts who have contributed nothing but that so far.
People should know by now that we always try to be as honest as possible and give our readers an exact impression of what to expect. I can understand that a honest opinion causes some disappointed expectations or justifications of purchases and but I didn't experience that here.. So far FM members were always able to stand the truth Especially in a case where I even say that I like and keep a lens. ...Show more →
did you have any focus issues that other are having while taking photos? (front focusing issues and or just completely not focusing correctly) i know that some are and tamron stated that they are working to fix it with a firmware update but idk im just on the fence on buying one for my A6500
p.37 #6 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
I had some situations where I expected some shots to be in focus while they weren't but not to a worrysome amount. I can't really complain so far although I didn't put it through a stress test yet.
p.37 #7 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Jannik, while others are disappointed in your review as you criticize aspects of a lens they bought, I am really disappointed in your review as it did not affirm my decision to not buy the lens. I agree with many of your criticisms of the lens but I simply cannot agree with your opinion on purchasing it! What value is there in a a review if it doesn’t confirm my choices?
p.37 #8 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Jannik Peters wrote:
Wow, I am surprised about the people who are trying to discredit my findings here, especially users with just a few posts who have contributed nothing but that so far.
Very informative review Jannik. The versality (and quality) of the pictures is impressive for such a short time of use.
About the quality: Don't put too much effort in explaining you here. It is, like you said, only about the look & feel on the outside and not about the build quality inside. Beside some objective facts (like the joint) the quality rating can only be very subjective. On the other hand it's also a reasonable place to reduce costs for tamron. Therefore I think you'll be right with what you posted.
About your findings: When I read your short summary inside this thread I thought, it's exactly what I expected (also your negative parts) and that's a good sign. It looks like Tamron didn't try to beat all other great zooms but focused on the strengths that are possible for the goaled specs (28-75, f2.8, light and small). In my oppinion (and I still wait on my copy) the pictures look very raw but not clean (like with the GM lenses). If this is good or bad depends on the job and preferences.
p.37 #9 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Thanks Jannik for the review, very informative. I have been interested in this lens since it was announced as a smaller and lighter version of the GM would have been nice. I will most certainly stick with my GM as it really is such a solid performer and as an event lens it's just superb and I will have to continue to live with it's weight and size
p.37 #10 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Excellent review Jannik and as unbiased as it can be.
Concerning lens tests, I ended up trusting only a few regulars of this forum, like you, Roger Cicala and Guy.
I’m absolutely disregarding those Internet reviewers with a “name” (and an obvious business commitment of some sort ). Besides, more often than not, those Youtube wise guys are less than competent (to put it mildly) concerning technical aspects of optics and lenses.
p.37 #11 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Just completed a rather big update of the review - Close focus sharpness (okay) , chromatic aberrations (very good) and flare performance (not that good) added.
p.37 #12 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Jannik Peters wrote:
Wow, I am surprised about the people who are trying to discredit my findings here, especially users with just a few posts who have contributed nothing but that so far.
People should know by now that we always try to be as honest as possible and give our readers an exact impression of what to expect. I can understand that a honest opinion causes some disappointed expectations or justifications of purchases and but I didn't experience that here.. So far FM members were always able to stand the truth Especially in a case where I even say that I like and keep a lens. ...Show more →
I see it all the time. It’s over expectations and folks want to think they bought a lens to beat the band for 800 dollars. Protecting there investment thinking they got a deal. Very typical reaction to a honest review on a product after they read all the fluff out there it’s the best lens going. It’s really a shame because basically they where mislead by reviewers that want to make a name for themselves and line their pockets. It’s one reason I stopped doing formal reviews. I just ran into this on a lens I bought that was a bad copy. For the 5 or 6 folks here on Fred’s place that are honest and forthright on these products that post their results here can run into this mindset. It’s a shame because there listening to this hype and not reality of a well qualified photographer and reviewer that goes against the BS out there. All I can say is do what you do and just ignore the rest. At least you can sleep good at night knowing you do the right thing. Best advice I can give you my friend.
BTW it’s helping me decide what to do. End of day that’s all you want to do is give good data
p.37 #13 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Jannik, I think your review captures the lens quite well. I don't think the build is quite as low end as you do, but that's simply difference of opinion.
In my testing so far, it's a rather good lens, and definitely worth the money, but I don't think it is GM level at all. Definitely some spherical aberration wide open at the long end close up, which softens detail quite a bit at that focus distance.
p.37 #14 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
For me it’s a decent price for a good lens. I wish it was 24mm but my thinking is this. I have a Loxia 25 and I really hate to go buy a Batis 25 even used its 800 so that gives me two 25 lenses at basically 2200 hundred dollars and that kind of bugs me. Not selling my Loxia either so for that 800 dollars for PR work I think this will work and if I need wider I can always slap on the Loxia 25. This gives me some range plus if I need faster I have the Rock 35 1.4. This is a PR need as I have a awesome landscape/ commercial manual focus kit to beat the band. So I’m not after the highest quality PR kit. So this may just be perfect but I want to wait until the firmware fix is out. Not that I’m afraid to spend the money at all it just bugs me investing in two 25mm lenses of the highest quality. My Loxia 25 cost 1400 dollars alone. So maybe this is my best option.
Problem is not a lot of options here on a AF kit.
Plus this will save me a rental fee next month if I own a mid zone 2.8
p.37 #16 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Jannik Peters wrote:
Wow, I am surprised about the people who are trying to discredit my findings here, especially users with just a few posts who have contributed nothing but that so far.
People should know by now that we always try to be as honest as possible and give our readers an exact impression of what to expect. I can understand that a honest opinion causes some disappointed expectations or justifications of purchases and but I didn't experience that here.. So far FM members were always able to stand the truth Especially in a case where I even say that I like and keep a lens. ...Show more →
I did not intend to discredit your findings in any way, and if i offended you I apologize. I think your review is pretty much spot on. My only complaint is regarding the build quality. The kit lens is a 400$. It is optically poor and slow. My copy the lens wiggles as you zoom. I could call it a POS. The tamron is much better built than this zoom. I would call the tamron a basic kit lens upgrade or maybe the lens that should have been a kit lens option. Compare it to the zeiss 24-70 which is more expensive, slower, optically inferior and no weather sealing. I guess my point is that the tamron is well built for f/2.8 zoom that costs under 1k and is designed to be light weight. (Light weight f/28 zoom hahaha okay that is sort of funny when you think about it.)
p.37 #17 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Jannik Peters wrote:
Wow, I am surprised about the people who are trying to discredit my findings here, especially users with just a few posts who have contributed nothing but that so far.
People should know by now that we always try to be as honest as possible and give our readers an exact impression of what to expect. I can understand that a honest opinion causes some disappointed expectations or justifications of purchases and but I didn't experience that here.. So far FM members were always able to stand the truth Especially in a case where I even say that I like and keep a lens. ...Show more →
I did not intend to discredit your findings in any way, and if i offended you I apologize. I think your review is pretty much spot on. My only complaint is regarding the build quality. The kit lens is a 400$. It is optically poor and slow. My copy the lens wiggles as you zoom. I could call it a POS. The tamron is much better built than this zoom. I would call the tamron a basic kit lens upgrade or maybe the lens that should have been a kit lens option. Compare it to the zeiss 24-70 which is more expensive, slower, optically inferior and no weather sealing. I guess my point is that the tamron is well built for f/2.8 zoom that costs under 1k and is designed to be light weight. (Light weight f/28 zoom hahaha okay that is sort of funny when you think about it.)
p.37 #20 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Jman and Jannik, reviews I like=real world good and bad. I'm currently in Newfoundland and would have been an owner but it would have shipped after we departed and sat for almost a month on the doorstep so I had to cancel. Nothing I'm seeing reading from your real reviews turns me away from this lens. Thank you both for the efforts.
Especially in a case where I even say that I like and keep a lens.