p.49 #1 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
There's a comparison on the board somewhere.
My personal tests have the Tamron generally* sharper wide open, and the CY generally* sharper stopped down.
* Mixed results, sometimes one lens sharper than the other at different focal lengths. Both very good, however, the Tamron was an easy choice for me. A ton more practical.
trogdon wrote:
Let’s see it against the Contax 35-70!
p.49 #2 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Yeah, discussed the matter briefly in the 35-70 topic: the C/Y is a stellar lens, especially for landscapes, but this Tamron seems a very decent performer even in that regard plus a thousands times more flexible even for a lot of other uses (events, sports, weddings, etc.). Tha A7III AF is so good that, at least for me, would too much of a pity not having a general zoom that can take full advantage of it.
Of course I won't get the nice "Zeiss look", but other pros for me far outweight the cons in choosing between the two lenses (of course the Tamron costs more than double, but will slowly go down price).
p.49 #3 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thanks for the samples!
I decided to get one and so far I'm impressed with it. First copy and very well centered.
It's super sharp in the center at some FLs (compares well with my best primes) and corners look good at f/8. Could be a great landscape zoom. Bokeh balls are rounded and clean.
Hi Fred
When you get an opportunity, please post some landscapes from tamron .. are interested in a zoom on the trips and are unsure if 28 is enough .. but I think GM 24-70 is too expensive right now .. going to Faroe Islands in Jan 2019 so I plan to get one before
p.49 #5 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
GMPhotography wrote:
Ronny just pack a Loxia 25 along with it. It’s actually really good at 28
it's so light (for this zoom range), that I just can't imagine taking off a good (I didn't say great) 28-75 2.8 to put on a 25mm 2.4 - in MANY situations. but this is b/c I shoot faces, that I would think this way.
with that said, I respect the Lox!
you know what - I really refrain from any more commenting until....
I get the tammy tomorrow...... dun dun dun..
and I own the b25 (23)
p.49 #7 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
I picked up a 28-75 on the B&S boards today. Had a Sigma 24-105 f/4 with adapter, which worked fine, but it was fairly big, and it's looking like it'll get used some for indoor stuff where f/2.8 would be preferred. The combo of size/performance/price was too hard to ignore once they worked out the firmware issues. If I need wider than 28 I've got the Batis 18, I'll have to decide if there's a need for something in-between. So far I think I'm ok.
p.49 #8 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
I just took a couple of snaps with the 28-75 in the camera store with their demo model. Reviewed the images at home and I must say, I'm quite impressed. What I really like is the close focusing at f/2.8. I'll have to think about this one . . .
p.49 #9 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
The bottom line on this lens is it really is sharp as heck. Big Bronco testing was quite impressive. It’s a modern lens with a modern character which for many many folks would be just great for its price point. Not everyone needs or wants to haul around a truck, mortgage the house and just want nice high quality images. That’s what it will do it’s very capable at all focal length. Now if your looking for lots of character and bokeh well there is better but not everyone’s a lens whore like a lot of us around here. One reason it’s hard to find in stock is it’s damn good and for many things perfect. I’m using it for work stuff but it’s more than capable for landscapes too. Once again it’s expectations, use case and budget really plus a nice handling lens. It’s better at 75 than the GM is at 70. That I know for sure. The harder choice for folks will be this and the 24-105. Both really good actually. Nice to have these options but on center this thing is hard to beat, no question. I’ll get the link to Big Bronco just in case anyone wants to look at that again.
p.49 #11 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
GMPhotography wrote:
Ronny just pack a Loxia 25 along with it. It’s actually really good at 28
I have Loxia 21 . sony zeiss 16-35 f4 and want to add a zoom in the 24-105 range.. I did download raw file from Big Bronco
test and tamron looks really good .. I am thinking mabye to trade in Loxia 50 which I don't use much nowadays .. the wonderful lens but I'm not particularly fond of the focal length . ,Do I make a mistake ? but if you don't use the lens as much, it may not matter
p.49 #12 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Ronny Olsson wrote:
Hi Fred
When you get an opportunity, please post some landscapes from tamron .. are interested in a zoom on the trips and are unsure if 28 is enough .. but I think GM 24-70 is too expensive right now .. going to Faroe Islands in Jan 2019 so I plan to get one before
Hi Ronny, I can post some crops showing how the Tamron performs at infinity which really helps for landscapes. From what I've seen, it has a very strong center at all FLs including 75mm which surprised me. Don't expect the corners to be at the level of your Loxia lenses. Your Loxia 50 is way better at mid-field and corners.
p.49 #13 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Ronny you can look at 24-105 also because you are a landscape photographer. Its really nice.
Ronny Olsson wrote:
I have Loxia 21 . sony zeiss 16-35 f4 and want to add a zoom in the 24-105 range.. I did download raw file from Big Bronco
test and tamron looks really good .. I am thinking mabye to trade in Loxia 50 which I don't use much nowadays .. the wonderful lens but I'm not particularly fond of the focal length . ,Do I make a mistake ? but if you don't use the lens as much, it may not matter
p.49 #14 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Ronny Olsson wrote:
I have Loxia 21 . sony zeiss 16-35 f4 and want to add a zoom in the 24-105 range.. I did download raw file from Big Bronco
test and tamron looks really good .. I am thinking mabye to trade in Loxia 50 which I don't use much nowadays .. the wonderful lens but I'm not particularly fond of the focal length . ,Do I make a mistake ? but if you don't use the lens as much, it may not matter
Ronny -- I went with the Sony 24-105G and highly recommend it to you. Also -- like you, I have the Loxia 50 and don't use it much. But when I do use the L50, it is amazing and makes me wonder why I don't tailor more shots for that lens. I will keep the L50 so I can choose between it and the L21 and L35 as my top primes.
p.49 #15 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Ronny Olsson wrote:
I have Loxia 21 . sony zeiss 16-35 f4 and want to add a zoom in the 24-105 range.. I did download raw file from Big Bronco
test and tamron looks really good .. I am thinking mabye to trade in Loxia 50 which I don't use much nowadays .. the wonderful lens but I'm not particularly fond of the focal length . ,Do I make a mistake ? but if you don't use the lens as much, it may not matter
I would also have a look at the Sony 24-105 first Ronny, because that's the range you mention. You'll especially appreciate the extra 3mm on the wide end.
If you don't use the 50 Loxia much anymore it's not a mistake to sell it, easy as that.
p.49 #16 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Ronny Olsson wrote:
I have Loxia 21 . sony zeiss 16-35 f4 and want to add a zoom in the 24-105 range.. I did download raw file from Big Bronco
test and tamron looks really good .. I am thinking mabye to trade in Loxia 50 which I don't use much nowadays .. the wonderful lens but I'm not particularly fond of the focal length . ,Do I make a mistake ? but if you don't use the lens as much, it may not matter
Im bad anything that sits is usually gone fairly fast. To me its money sitting around doing nothing, bugs me to no end.
p.49 #17 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
I debated with myself between the Sony 24-105 and the Tamron 28-75 for a long time. I went for the Tamron 28-75, since it's f/2.8, which I think is still useful indoors and in poor lighting conditions outdoors. Also size and weight are concerns. I'm convinced that both lenses are great choices, based on the input here at FM.
p.49 #18 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
One thing to note is that while Tammy’s long end sounds like really good for portraits because of F2.8, in reality, the blur-ability of 24-105 at 105/4 is equal.
75/2.8 = 26
105/4 = 26
Also, at 105 and low light handheld, 24-105 may give more keepers because of fantastic OSS. Not sure about this though.
p.49 #19 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
The OSS is notably more than a full stop better than the IBIS when used with the 28-75? Anything back that up?
nandadevieast wrote:
One thing to note is that while Tammy’s long end sounds like really good for portraits because of F2.8, in reality, the blur-ability of 24-105 at 105/4 is equal.
75/2.8 = 26
105/4 = 26
Also, at 105 and low light handheld, 24-105 will give more keepers because of fantastic OSS.
p.49 #20 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
General remark, sorry.
I have used 24-105 and found i could shoot at incredibly low speeds, even at 1/5, so i think despite having a stop advantage, Tammy may not fare as well for still subjects because of not having OSS.
Since i sold my 24-105, i am considering Tammy, mostly because of size, but not sure right now.
Jman13 wrote:
The OSS is notably more than a full stop better than the IBIS when used with the 28-75? Anything back that up?
