Archive 2005 · Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
p.1 #1Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
Whats the differece between these two:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=246&cat=43
Tamron SP AF28-75MM F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)
https://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=187&cat=43
Tamron AF 28-75mm f2.8 XR Di Zoom
Tamron only has the Aspherical on their web site and you can only get this one on B&H.
Are they the same lense?
Thanks
https://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=246&cat=43
Tamron SP AF28-75MM F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)
https://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=187&cat=43
Tamron AF 28-75mm f2.8 XR Di Zoom
Tamron only has the Aspherical on their web site and you can only get this one on B&H.
Are they the same lense?
Thanks
Feb 27, 2005 at 11:53 AM
p.1 #2Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
It looks like the same lens. I have this model which I purchased new 2 months ago and it looks the same as the picture in each link you posted.
Feb 27, 2005 at 03:32 PM
p.1 #3Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
fisherth wrote:
Whats the differece between these two:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=246&cat=43
Tamron SP AF28-75MM F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)
https://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=187&cat=43
Tamron AF 28-75mm f2.8 XR Di Zoom
Tamron only has the Aspherical on their web site and you can only get this one on B&H.
Are they the same lense?
Thanks
They are the same lens.
Whats the differece between these two:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=246&cat=43
Tamron SP AF28-75MM F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)
https://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=187&cat=43
Tamron AF 28-75mm f2.8 XR Di Zoom
Tamron only has the Aspherical on their web site and you can only get this one on B&H.
Are they the same lense?
Thanks
They are the same lens.
Feb 27, 2005 at 07:43 PM
p.1 #4Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
Jay, I noticed you are shooting the Tamron 28-75 2.8 with an EOS 3. How do you like the Tamron on full frame slide or print film?
Feb 27, 2005 at 07:49 PM
p.1 #5Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
Elrond,
So far I like it a lot. However, I have only used it around the yard and adjacent woods. I ran some test shots with slide film to explore depth of field, real-world sharpness, and bokeh using the snowy woods as subject matter. I was also working on metering technique to keep the snow white. The results were fine for my tastes.
I recently bought a used Canon 200 2.8L, here on FM, to add a longer focal length. I shot some of the same tests in the woods. Holding the slides up side by side I can't tell the difference between the two lenses. I plan to repeat this using both lenses on the same roll of film in the same light, etc, and to project the slides to see what differences are evident. I am comparing the lenses just out of curiosity after reading so many "L" comments here, not to make any particular decisions.
Jay
So far I like it a lot. However, I have only used it around the yard and adjacent woods. I ran some test shots with slide film to explore depth of field, real-world sharpness, and bokeh using the snowy woods as subject matter. I was also working on metering technique to keep the snow white. The results were fine for my tastes.
I recently bought a used Canon 200 2.8L, here on FM, to add a longer focal length. I shot some of the same tests in the woods. Holding the slides up side by side I can't tell the difference between the two lenses. I plan to repeat this using both lenses on the same roll of film in the same light, etc, and to project the slides to see what differences are evident. I am comparing the lenses just out of curiosity after reading so many "L" comments here, not to make any particular decisions.
Jay
Mar 01, 2005 at 02:48 PM
p.1 #6Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
Searched and found this thread, as I also saw the two reviews and JUST ordered this lens from Adorama and thought what did I do!!! reviews look good, will report back when it arrives next week. I usually shy away from 3rd party lens, but at this price, f stop and zoom range and all the good reviews, it seemed worth a shot.
I checked Tamron's site and they only showed the one vintage, so we should be ok...I hope!
G2
I checked Tamron's site and they only showed the one vintage, so we should be ok...I hope!
G2
Mar 01, 2005 at 03:25 PM
p.1 #7Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
I bought this lens last week after going back and forth. I really want a Canon "L" lens, but can not fork up the cash right now. For the money of the Tamron, I though I would try it.
so far so good. I have been happy with it. I was woried about the lag, and heard it "Serches" for light. I have not had any issues yet. I am happy with this lens.
so far so good. I have been happy with it. I was woried about the lag, and heard it "Serches" for light. I have not had any issues yet. I am happy with this lens.
Mar 01, 2005 at 05:35 PM
p.1 #8Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
I have this lens and I like it a lot - for people shots.
However...a curious thing...I don't care for it at all for landscape shots.
To my eyes it renders people quite nicely....but landscapes just come out kind of blah....regardless of aperture used.
I'm curious if anyone else has a similar experience...or if I'm just quirky...about the lens I mean.
However...a curious thing...I don't care for it at all for landscape shots.
To my eyes it renders people quite nicely....but landscapes just come out kind of blah....regardless of aperture used.
I'm curious if anyone else has a similar experience...or if I'm just quirky...about the lens I mean.
Mar 01, 2005 at 05:48 PM
p.1 #9Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
rburbank wrote:
I have this lens and I like it a lot - for people shots.
However...a curious thing...I don't care for it at all for landscape shots.
To my eyes it renders people quite nicely....but landscapes just come out kind of blah....regardless of aperture used.
I'm curious if anyone else has a similar experience...or if I'm just quirky...about the lens I mean.
Interesting! I may have a similar experience - I tested my copy and it is sharpest at f/5.6-8. Beyond f/8, diffraction starts to creep in, and perhaps the "quality" of the diffraction makes it more "bleah" when we use the lens during landscapes. I'm not sure if this is documented anywhere though... perhaps this is something like "reverse bokeh"
I have this lens and I like it a lot - for people shots.
However...a curious thing...I don't care for it at all for landscape shots.
To my eyes it renders people quite nicely....but landscapes just come out kind of blah....regardless of aperture used.
I'm curious if anyone else has a similar experience...or if I'm just quirky...about the lens I mean.
Interesting! I may have a similar experience - I tested my copy and it is sharpest at f/5.6-8. Beyond f/8, diffraction starts to creep in, and perhaps the "quality" of the diffraction makes it more "bleah" when we use the lens during landscapes. I'm not sure if this is documented anywhere though... perhaps this is something like "reverse bokeh"
Mar 01, 2005 at 05:52 PM
p.1 #10Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
Jay, it would be great to read your comments about the comparison shots whenever you get the chance. That 200/2.8 is a champ.
I have been tempted for awhile by the Tamron, but have been concerned by the performance on full frame slide/film. Right now I have been debating the 35/2, just to round out the primes in my most used range.
$370 for the Tamron would be the top end of my budget. Its a pain building a lens collection on a limited disposable income.
Good info on the landscape issue. That would be one of the areas I would use it. You may be feeding a prime addiction...
Mar 01, 2005 at 06:00 PM
p.1 #11Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
Elrond,
Just as background, for a number of years had been using manual medium format cameras - Mamiya RB 67 and Bronica S2A -with prime lenses. I came back to 35mm for the auto focus capability as my eyes aged and continued using primes because I had become accustomed to them. This past autumn we went to Italy and I felt I should take a zoom for convenience. I did a lot of reading and settled on the Tamron 24-135 3.5-5.6 which was highly rated. It produced very nice images in bright light, but after using it intensively (27 rolls of film in 14 days) I decided I would prefer a faster, lighter zoom. Hence I sold the 24-135 and bought the 28-75. It feels just right on the EOS 3 and I can't wait to give it a good work out. I'll try to run some more tests this weekend on the 28-75 and 200 L. Then the film will need to be developed and scanned. If the scans turn out ok I'll post them.
-- Jay
Just as background, for a number of years had been using manual medium format cameras - Mamiya RB 67 and Bronica S2A -with prime lenses. I came back to 35mm for the auto focus capability as my eyes aged and continued using primes because I had become accustomed to them. This past autumn we went to Italy and I felt I should take a zoom for convenience. I did a lot of reading and settled on the Tamron 24-135 3.5-5.6 which was highly rated. It produced very nice images in bright light, but after using it intensively (27 rolls of film in 14 days) I decided I would prefer a faster, lighter zoom. Hence I sold the 24-135 and bought the 28-75. It feels just right on the EOS 3 and I can't wait to give it a good work out. I'll try to run some more tests this weekend on the 28-75 and 200 L. Then the film will need to be developed and scanned. If the scans turn out ok I'll post them.
-- Jay
Mar 01, 2005 at 08:35 PM
p.1 #12Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
Read a remark about this lens that worries me a little, saying that if they wanted to shoot at 28mm they had to zoom out to 75 first, focus there and pull back to 28 and take the shot, otherwise the images would be soft?
Anyone else find this to be the case
Mine's enroute tonight so I may get it on Saturday I hope...till then I'll sit back and be nervous!
G2
Anyone else find this to be the case
Mine's enroute tonight so I may get it on Saturday I hope...till then I'll sit back and be nervous!
G2
Mar 02, 2005 at 06:15 PM
p.1 #13Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
Gary W. Graley wrote:
Anyone else find this to be the case
G2
No, although the 28 end is a bit softer.
Anyone else find this to be the case
G2
No, although the 28 end is a bit softer.
Mar 02, 2005 at 07:17 PM
p.1 #14Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
Gary W. Graley wrote:
Read a remark about this lens that worries me a little, saying that if they wanted to shoot at 28mm they had to zoom out to 75 first, focus there and pull back to 28 and take the shot, otherwise the images would be soft?
Anyone else find this to be the case
Mine's enroute tonight so I may get it on Saturday I hope...till then I'll sit back and be nervous!
G2
Never had that issue with mine. It is easily the nicest piece of glass in my limited collection. I recently used it at a wedding and was amazed at the sharpness, color, and contrast. Here's a sample: http://www.fphoto.org/jamiewexler//alex&max%20283a
Read a remark about this lens that worries me a little, saying that if they wanted to shoot at 28mm they had to zoom out to 75 first, focus there and pull back to 28 and take the shot, otherwise the images would be soft?
Anyone else find this to be the case
Mine's enroute tonight so I may get it on Saturday I hope...till then I'll sit back and be nervous!
G2
Never had that issue with mine. It is easily the nicest piece of glass in my limited collection. I recently used it at a wedding and was amazed at the sharpness, color, and contrast. Here's a sample: http://www.fphoto.org/jamiewexler//alex&max%20283a
Mar 02, 2005 at 07:19 PM
p.1 #15Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
Me 2 Jaime...I'm always shocked when i read differently in these forums...but we all different....
Mar 02, 2005 at 07:26 PM
p.1 #16Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
Ditto... I'm a believer, too. I can use the money saved to buy more socks.
Mar 02, 2005 at 07:27 PM
p.1 #17Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
Jamie Wexler, nice shot! appreciate that link, cheers me up a little bit...
G2
G2
Mar 02, 2005 at 07:32 PM
p.1 #18Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
I was just gonna post a new topic on this issue. The basic Zoom had great reviews, when I went to the store they had this Aspherical (IF) Macro on the sheft but not the Zoom. The guy told me this is a new installment to the older Zoom with different glass arrangment inside, making it look better wide open..
Anybody care to comment on it?
Anybody do any test?
I really wanna get this lens. But first i wanna figure out if I should find myself a used Zoom or get the new Aspherical (IF).
Anybody care to comment on it?
Anybody do any test?
I really wanna get this lens. But first i wanna figure out if I should find myself a used Zoom or get the new Aspherical (IF).
Mar 03, 2005 at 12:47 AM
p.1 #19Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
The Aspherical Macro is the version everyone is raving about. Go forth and buy in confidence.
Mar 03, 2005 at 02:45 AM
p.1 #20Tamron AF28-75 2.8 XR
Today I took a bunch of test shots outside on Velvia 50 with the Tamron 28-75, Canon 200 2.8 L and Canon 50 1.4. It was a very nice "sunny f16" sort of day. The film should be develped in a few days. Hopefully this thread will still be alive when it gets scanned.
--Jay
--Jay
Mar 05, 2005 at 06:19 PM