p.20 #3 · p.20 #3 · Pre-order Now: Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD ($899)
I'm not surprised as the 28-75/2.8 is not exactly famous for its rendering either...Tamron seems to be totally neglecting rendering in exchange for higher resolution and contrast.
Great lenses for landscapes though.
p.20 #12 · p.20 #12 · Pre-order Now: Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD ($899)
Pulled trigger on the Ebay, even without the 10%. Had been tossing around idea of spending a little more for a used 12-24, but the fear of getting a bad decentered copy someone wanted to dump scared me haha.
Coming from Nikon, where the widesr I was at was 24mm, this should be nice and complement the 28-75 I have, which I really love.
p.20 #17 · p.20 #17 · Pre-order Now: Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD ($899)
Dustin's review has astro/coma samples towards the end, and the lens performs quite well at f2.8. I haven't had a chance to shoot stars with mine yet, having cloud cover in my area the past week during the evenings.
p.20 #18 · p.20 #18 · Pre-order Now: Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD ($899)
Glad to see the coma report. I've tried the last two nights but I have a cloud generator in the backyard. Considering this a zoom I think the coma is fine....not on FE 12-24G level (no coma) but way better than my Laowa 15/2.
p.20 #19 · p.20 #19 · Pre-order Now: Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD ($899)
I'm trying to think of a reason not to trade my Sony 16-35mm f4 for this lens! Cons: the Tamron isn't as wide and not as long. Pros: it's 2.8 and fixed barrel. I actually like having the option of 16mm, because it's just that little bit wider. Though 35mm f/4 is pretty useless especially in low light situations. The tamron with 2.8 @ 28mm sounds far more useful for things like indoor photography and even for portraiture paired with a fast prime.
Though the zooming barrel of the 16-35mm f/4 is annoying especially in the field, for example being at the beach worrying about sand particles getting into the zoom mechanism or sea spray while being on a boat out in the Pacific Ocean! Though my 16-35mm f/4 has actually held up well and the zooming barrel still maintains smooth zooming. I wonder if the Tamron will hold up as well in regards to build quality?
The only major pro I can think of for the 16-35mm f/4 is that the in-lens OSS gives it a slight advantage in handheld situations, but maybe not since I use my adapted Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 and can nail 1/15th second shots with ease.
p.20 #20 · p.20 #20 · Pre-order Now: Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD ($899)
I think 16-35/4 has better sunstars through a broader range. So far only decent sunstars I've seen with the 17-28 is at F22.
And, personal opinion, 16-35 renders more pleasantly to my eye.
That said I'd sell mine too but the better-half gets dibs.
Bet you critics will cringe.
