Bifurcator Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
debuggerus wrote:
Looks nice, BIF. Looks like you got a nice copy which is all that matters.
My copy, though not bad, didn't give the WOW factor (on full frame) I barely touched it.
The 35-80/2.8-3.8 and the 24-48/3.5-3.8 are picked more often.
Peire wrote:
I tried 35-80/2.8-3.8 and 28-80/3.5-4.2 SP Tamrons - both very sharp plus useful macro function.If I hadn't Zeiss VS 35-70/3.4 I would probably have kept one of them.The only shortcoming I noticed was poor flare resistance,but it's not a major flaw especially for that price/built quality.
Yeah, mine looks like it would be prone to flaring and probably show most at the wide end. I haven't really sun tested it yet. All of the above were shot with that low looming mountain fog/haze that happens so often this time of year. "conversion layer" or something like that.
Anyway for the going rate on these I think they're really underpriced. I wonder if it's because of the public perception created by Tamron mixing crap glass with good lenses all under the same name - I know I used to think all tamrons and tolkinas were to be avoided. How does Sigma get away with doing the same thing without having to wear the jacket? I have another Tamron SP Zoom that's hell'a sharp too. The 60-300mm f/3.8 (23A) with a very usable 1:1.55 macro... And you guys say those other two are also excellent... Hmmm...
Let's start a cartel where we buy all of them at the current incredibly cheap prices and then wait a few years for the world to forget about them. We can reintroduce them at 10x the price and consumers will eat it up! 
|