p.3 #2 · Tamron 28-75/2.8 FE Infinity test (Resolution & Contrast)
Fred Miranda wrote:
I actually thought the Tamron was very impressive at center. It matches or surprasses the 40/1.2 resolution-wise at f/2.8. It's well corrected with high contrast as well. My only negative is the astigmatism towards the corners and high contrast and harsh OOF rendering.
On the other hand, the 40/1.2 is very special at f/1.2 + mid-distance and I don't think any other lens can match that look.
Not thinking so much about resolution or the technical differences, more just the colours. The Tamron seems to be more generic, while the Voigtlander has something special. Is the colour signature difference measurable, or am I imagining it?
p.3 #3 · Tamron 28-75/2.8 FE Infinity test (Resolution & Contrast)
First off, I absolutely know that I'm not owed an answer here. At all.
I've asked this a couple of times now, and not a single response. Is it just me that sees a color signature difference here? As I said - am I imagining it? It's not a rhetorical question.
p.3 #4 · Tamron 28-75/2.8 FE Infinity test (Resolution & Contrast)
zaphodm wrote:
First off, I absolutely know that I'm not owed an answer here. At all.
I've asked this a couple of times now, and not a single response. Is it just me that sees a color signature difference here? As I said - am I imagining it? It's not a rhetorical question.
I shot this Big Bronco wall at least a 100 times doing testing and the color signature of the Tammy seems to be quite good . Also in this thread is a nice portrait that i did not even WB and turned out perfect for subject. Not sure what your looking for but might be worth a read anyway
p.3 #5 · Tamron 28-75/2.8 FE Infinity test (Resolution & Contrast)
Thank you for the reply. I don't mind the colors of the Tamron at all, happy with what I'm getting from it. It just doesn't "sing".
Wondering specifically about the colors of the Tamron vs the colors of Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2. Tamron seems generic, where the 40mm seems to have something extra (to my eyes). Trying to turn that difference into something tangible that I can use to maybe adjust my photos from the Tamron to closer match the colors of the Voigtlander. Maybe I'm just being too vague or abstract about what I'm looking for. Probably will just have to wait until I can afford to buy the Voigtlander and compare them myself.
Thanks!
(And I know this sounds like I'm looking for a magic one-click-type solution to make an average photo magical, but it's not that. There's just something about the 40/f1.2 shots that hit a spot in my brain. Color is one. If I can work out what it is, I can not only look to get that from other images, I can find where that also occurs in the real world, or where it enhances the story/completeness of the image.)
Do you guys ever get that twang in your brain from something that just makes you go "that's me"? In my artwork it's always been a particular color palette (six particular Derwent pencil colors), or a particular paper (BFK Rives), or a particular font (Doves Type).
Once it hits, it doesn't go away.
With lenses, I've had a lot of near hits (Canon S-series 50mm f/1.4 and Hexanon 57mm f/1.2 come to mind straight away), but that 40 is just me.
p.3 #6 · Tamron 28-75/2.8 FE Infinity test (Resolution & Contrast)
Any comments on the close-focusing ability of the tamron vs either sony options? I was thinking of picking one up as an all-purpose, but I shoot a lot of food photography and don't necessarily need true macro (too niche of a lens for my purposes), but having closer focus always is a plus.
p.3 #7 · Tamron 28-75/2.8 FE Infinity test (Resolution & Contrast)
Sullivan I don't know if this pic will help, it is kinda macro.
I've got the FE24-105 too. Next summer the better-half is scheming a trip to a bear camp in Alaska. My choice for my 'normal zoom' will be the Tamron. Limited weight on the little planes. I'll have longer glass but the Tam can do triple duty and the weight is important.
Triple duty=landscape, pseudo-macro, F2.8=wide field astro, 75mm (hopefully on a new crop Sony body) close telephoto.
I can do more of a macro shot if it will help. But snowing tonight and bugs are gone
p.3 #8 · Tamron 28-75/2.8 FE Infinity test (Resolution & Contrast)
sullivanrp wrote:
Any comments on the close-focusing ability of the tamron vs either sony options? I was thinking of picking one up as an all-purpose, but I shoot a lot of food photography and don't necessarily need true macro (too niche of a lens for my purposes), but having closer focus always is a plus.
Dustin Abbott did quite a good video demonstrating the differences in minimum focus capability on YouTube. It's about 19 minutes into this video:
p.3 #9 · Tamron 28-75/2.8 FE Infinity test (Resolution & Contrast)
zaphodm wrote:
Dustin Abbott did quite a good video demonstrating the differences in minimum focus capability on YouTube. It's about 19 minutes into this video
p.3 #10 · Tamron 28-75/2.8 FE Infinity test (Resolution & Contrast)
Its a bit amazing comparing an $800 lens to a $2200 one. A factor to me would be the higher chromatic aberration, fringing, of the Sony lens vice the Tamron, although it may be difficult to identify without this reviewer point it out.. Didn't know that. Also learned that the higher magnification for the Tamron in close focusing was at the wide end. Been using the lens mostly at that end anyway, probably because i enjoyed the semi macro effect at that end/close focusing. No wonder that the Tamron is so badly back-ordered.
Happy with the choice i made on the Tamron, but there is nothing wrong with the other 2 choices either, its all pros and cons. Sorry about the size of the image below, didn't realize it would come out that big.
p.3 #11 · Tamron 28-75/2.8 FE Infinity test (Resolution & Contrast)
Fred Miranda wrote:
Summary at 75mm:
Optimum aperture for best resolution/contrast across the field: f/5.6
Best center resolution: f/5.6
Fred I saw your test at 75mm, check out this shot wide open at 75mm. How sharp is this thing, I’m new to photography but I can’t imagine getting too much more out of the 73r.
p.3 #12 · Tamron 28-75/2.8 FE Infinity test (Resolution & Contrast)
sullivanrp wrote:
Any comments on the close-focusing ability of the tamron vs either sony options? I was thinking of picking one up as an all-purpose, but I shoot a lot of food photography and don't necessarily need true macro (too niche of a lens for my purposes), but having closer focus always is a plus.
Pretty sure that Tamron does 1:4. Its quite useful. If it weren't for that bokeh, it would be just about perfect.
p.3 #13 · Tamron 28-75/2.8 FE Infinity test (Resolution & Contrast)
David Kilpatrik from Camera Quest magazine and photoclubalpha, who is a very knowledgeable qnd technically sound reviewer, tested this lens. Its not published yet but in answer to my query, he said the lens is stellar.
“...I have not done final A-B tests against the 24-105mm yet, but based on a couple of weeks of shooting with 28-75mm, the microcontrast/sharpness is a notch above.”
“Tamron's 28-75mm f/2.8 FE (Sony) new lens is probably one of the highest micro-contrast zooms I've ever used. It's more Zeiss than Zeiss achieves these days.”
High praise indeed. He also said it blows away older Tammy from film era.
