Yeah, it seems like everyone is upping their game. Sure there could be something smaller (which the Sigma 28-70 already is), but at some point something has to give. Either speed, quality, etc. While it's slightly longer than my 24-105, it doesn't feel as bulky. Sure the 24-105 has more range and OSS, but it's slower as well. I've sort of consolidated down to 67mm as my standard filter size, so this puts me good there. I have the 14-24, which I have special filters for, and the 100-400 which I don't often use filters.
I look forward to getting out more and shooting with it, seems like I often get new lenses AFTER a period where I do a lot of shooting. Most of the leaves drop, and boom the Fedex guy knocks on my door.
JVan_02 wrote:
Your tests have been especially impressive. Tbh, I've avoided using my (loaned) 24-105 G very often because I find it doesn't really come into its own until 5.6/8, which isn't always the best for casual documentary... especially with the faster moving smaller subjects :P
Your tests showing it competing pretty well with the the APO-Lanthar of all lenses have been especially dramatic, and along with other reviews have made it very likely that at some point this will find its way into my bag as a dedicated spring/summer outing workhorse.
At this point, I think the only thing that could sway my opinion away from this lens would be an even more impressive reproduction ratio and/or an even greater reduction in size. I'd be fine with limiting the zoom range even further to make either happen, but this is the first zoom I've really seen that would relax the death grip my hands have on primes for their obvious advantages in image quality—and that's the one thing that can't change for me in a possible future purchase. ...Show more →
I don't, but maybe I can swing a few this weekend....
Fboss wrote:
I owned the first version of this Tamron and the main reason why I sold it was the bokeh. dpreview has posted their review and confirms this has been improved with the G2.
This is really a nice upgrade from G1. Better AF, sharpness and rendering.
@tsdevine@, thanks for posting the comparison pictures. The differences with the CV are really small. By any chance do you have a few (close up) shots taken with the G2 at 75mm f/2.8, I would like to see the rendering ?
It's wide open at 66mm. I'll try to do 75mm sometime this weekend...
-Tim
Fboss wrote:
I owned the first version of this Tamron and the main reason why I sold it was the bokeh. dpreview has posted their review and confirms this has been improved with the G2.
This is really a nice upgrade from G1. Better AF, sharpness and rendering.
@tsdevine@, thanks for posting the comparison pictures. The differences with the CV are really small. By any chance do you have a few (close up) shots taken with the G2 at 75mm f/2.8, I would like to see the rendering ?
It's wide open at 66mm. I'll try to do 75mm sometime this weekend...
-Tim
That bokeh looks pretty damn dreamy for a zoom that only costs $799 (EDU). I'm really surprised they only increased the price by $20. I loved my Tamron 15-30 and 70-200 2.8 on my D810 but wasn't blown away by the rendering of the first iteration of their Sony glass and so purchased Sigma lenses. I wonder if this G2 and the 35-150 represent a new era in Tamron e-mount zoom lenses. Very interested in what they come up with next.
I’m using an a7R III with Sony batteries and I’m not seeing this behavior. I put a fully charged battery in the camera last night and it’s still at 100% this morning.
Andydr wrote:
Hi everyone.
I don't suppose anyone has noticed any battery drain issues with the 28-75 G2?
I got mine on Friday, tested it briefly, and the battery was drained when I turned it on in Saturday (from about 35%). I put a fresh battery in on Saturday and it was down to 23% when I turned it back on this morning.
I was looking at the Flickr group for the 28-75 last night and I was somewhat surprised by how many highly creative, beautifully rendered images there were. Far more than I would normally expect from a “standard zoom lens”. It seems to help people make good pictures. I’m quite tempted, especially since the G1 is coming up on eBay for reasonable money.
I used to have G1 version. It was super sharp in centre and had decent rendering. This one is supposed to be even slightly sharper with much better corner sharpness plus with less harsh bokeh. Overall seems like a good lens. The only issue is quite steep price at €950. I presume within 6 months it will settle down to more reasonable €800.
milkod2001 wrote:
I used to have G1 version. It was super sharp in centre and had decent rendering. This one is supposed to be even slightly sharper with much better corner sharpness plus with less harsh bokeh. Overall seems like a good lens. The only issue is quite steep price at €950. I presume within 6 months it will settle down to more reasonable €800.
Tamron's US/EU pricing is so odd. I'd be curious what market data they base the difference on.
Fboss wrote:
I owned the first version of this Tamron and the main reason why I sold it was the bokeh. dpreview has posted their review and confirms this has been improved with the G2.
This is really a nice upgrade from G1. Better AF, sharpness and rendering.
@tsdevine@, thanks for posting the comparison pictures. The differences with the CV are really small. By any chance do you have a few (close up) shots taken with the G2 at 75mm f/2.8, I would like to see the rendering ?
I did some brick wall tests comparing my Sony 24-105G, Sigma 24-70 DN, and Tamron 28-75 G2. A while ago I noticed the size of jpg files can be used as a measure of the detail captured to come up with numeric comparisons for lenses. This method generates a number for overall detail captured in the entire frame. Of course you have to keep other details the same like, subject, iso, etc. I will probobly start another thread about this method of lens testing. As I adjust the focal length I move the camera away from the wall so the same section is captured. I shoot a 9 ft tall x 13.5 ft wide section of bricks.
The conditions were not ideal: cloudy, windy, with some light mist / sleet / snow during the testing. So these are very preliminary results. I also noticed the 28-75 has a "centering" issue. Despite the issue, the results are quite good. My prior Tamron 28-75 G1 was bested by the 24-105 at all focal lengths and aperatures except a couple points at 50mm where the 24-105 is a bit weak.
Figure 1 shows the centering problem at 70mm for the Tamron. My belief is don't let perfect be the enemy of the good, but this is a visible flaw at that range that I find unnaceptable.
Figure 2 show good centering for the sigma at 70mm for comparison.
The rest show the comparison between the lenses, focus at the center. My 35GM is very sharp, it tests almost as sharp as my 135GM. My 24-105 is very strong at 28mm and 85mm. The fact the other lenses are similar at 28mm is a good result.
The preliminary tests make me want to find a copy of the 28-75 that is better aligned.
Steve
Figure 1. Data from 5 series of tests with focus on center, top, bottom, left, right.
Figure 2. Data from 5 series of test to check Sigma centering, it is good!!
So based on my above testing, I would like to try a different copy of the 28-75. How do people typically do that? I ordered that one from B&H, obviously I will return it, do I tell them it is deffective and ask for an exchange? Any other tips?
