 |
|
|
jason shanks
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 2, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Feb 2, 2007
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality, top quality materials
|
|
Cons:
|
Very slow and very soft. Started getting lent inside the lens barrel.
|
|
|
I’m going to have to go against the grain here. This lens is soft. The auto focus speed is very slow. Even at the sharpest apertures of f5.6 at 24-70 and f8 at 70-135. Pictures had a funny old style TV (red, green, yellow) pattern when blown up. I got this used from eBay for $200usd, 5 months ago. I honestly didn’t have a problem with it, till I got an 18-70mm Nikon lens. There was no comparison in sharpness at any aperture. This started to bug me, as I would take important shots only to find that softness around detailed areas of the photo. Good for people coming from point and shoot cameras? Yes. The only reason I kept this lens was for its macro feature. When you photograph small products for sale on eBay under good light, this thing kills the Nikon 18-70mm lens. But it was destine not to be. I sold this on eBay again for a $40.00 loss. If you want sharp photos, do not get this lens. Last but not least, the lens sucks in dust like a vacuum cleaner.
I will end this on a positive note about the lens. All metal body build with rubber grips. It’s built very well. I find it funny that my Nikon glass is made so poorly and yet sharper.
|
|
 Feb 2, 2007
|
|
Mike Ganz
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Sep 5, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2187
|
|
Review Date: Nov 20, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality, great range, crisp/clear images, good color and contrast, great lens for the money
|
|
Cons:
|
A bit soft wide open
|
|
|
This was the first lens that purchased for my 30D. I wanted a versatile walkaround lens before getting additional lenses. At first, I was a little leery about buying a Tamron lens until I read the reviews here first. Tamron has definitely improved. Even though its a bit soft when wide open, once stopped down it takes razor-sharp images at all focal lengths. After getting the lens, I took several shots of a metal horse barn as a way to test out the sharpness. Since the metal panels have many seams and ridges, I figured that this would be a pretty good test. I also took additional shots of the same barn with my 17-40L. When comparing the full size images, the sharpness of the Tamron almost equaled that of the L lens. Its that good. I'm very satisfied with this lens, and would definitely recommend it as a good, everyday walkaround lens. This is still my primary lens.
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2006
|
|
EyeBrock
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 3, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1011
|
|
Review Date: Oct 28, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Reasonable build quality, optically very nice, good range, even on a 1.6.
Great on a tripod. Pretty cheap.
|
|
Cons:
|
Slow AF( I have missed too many good shots), problems with ETTL II flash sync with my 580EX, the lens lock is a pain.
|
|
|
This was the first lens I bought after ditching my old Minolta film gear and going with a 20D.
I have some great landcsape shots, mostly on a tripod, that I got with this lens. However on a 20D I noticed the AF rarely got locks on more than 2 of the 9 AF points in the viewfinder.
The AF really is slow and makes moving people and kid shots a challenge, as in a bit of a pain in the arse.
I also get very mixed results with my 580EX flash, sometimes I get a decent shot, sometimes not. This is also a problem with my tam 17-35 lense, but not my 70-200 F4L.
I have learned much about digital photography from this lens so I don't regret buying it. It's just that my abilities have outstripped this lens's capabilities.
On top of a tripod for landscape/outdoor shots it is more than adequate.
It's also a good starter lens. But I have moved on and I shelled out for the Canon 24-105 IS F4L, which is just amazing!
My tam 24-135 is now for sale!
Good bye old chum.....
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2006
|
|
daliangr
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 16, 2006
Location: Greece
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 17, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
build quality,size,fast focusing,nice colors,flare well controlled
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
I am owner of many lenses.I compare the TAMRON with
NIKON prime 50mm f1,4
NIKON prime 85MM F1,8
TOKINA prime100mm f2,8
SIGMA 24-60mm f2,8
SIGMA 70-300mm f4-5,6
This is no so sharp but approaches the others.
The better results with NIKON D50 is with flash +0,7 and
sharpest aperture is f5,6 (24-80)mm & f8 (80-135)mm.
I believe this is the best lens for travel.
|
|
|
May 17, 2006
|
|
BeoR
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 1, 2006
Location: Philippines
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 17, 2006
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: $399.00
|
|
Pros:
|
Range, sharpness, contrast, build quality, price
|
|
Cons:
|
A little slow AF, hunts in low light
|
|
|
I was juggling my decision between this lens, a Canon 24-70 f/2.8, and a Sigma 24-70 f/2.8. After looking at reviews numerous times, I settled for this lens mainly for its range... it is just perfect. The Canon was just too pricey and the Sigma had too many complaints. Although I would have loved the low light capabilities of the Sigma / Canon, the added weight was too much for a walk-around.
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2006
|
|
BeoR
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 1, 2006
Location: Philippines
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 16, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $399.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Range, sharpness, build quality, contrast.
|
|
Cons:
|
A bit slow autofocus, hunts in low light.
|
|
|
I've been juggling between this, a Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, and Canon 24-70 f/2.8. After some pondering the range of this lens outweigh all the other aspects of the others. Pricewise this is a steal. Quality is superb. Sharpness is top-notch and contrast is definitely up there with the "L's".
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2006
|
|
dgdot
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 25, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Mar 12, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $255.00
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Range, build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Sharpness, detail
|
|
Purchased this lens (used) as a replacement for the kit lens.
My decision initially was between this lens and the 28-75. Chose the 24-135 based on the extra range as well as the very good reviews from this site. I have to say that I was fairly disappointed, mainly in the image quality. Wide-open, the kit lens produced better images. The Tamron improved at about f8, but image quality was not substantially better than the kit lens (and in most cases, worse). I took some comparison photos here:
http://s91991420.onlinehome.us/lens-comparison/
Will return this lens and probably try the 28-75.
|
|
|
Mar 12, 2006
|
|
prof_fate
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Dec 15, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5098
|
|
Review Date: Mar 10, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $369.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, low light focusing, range, value for the money, best lens in this class (range/speed combo), build, color and contrast
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
I was using a sigma 18-50 2.8 EX as my walkaround and wanted more range. I considered the canon 28-135 IS and tried the Canon 17-85 IS and the Tarmon 24-135 SP - the tamron was $240 less than the 17-85, as sharp, as fast to focus and had more range, and at thelonger ranges is a shade faster. The 28-135 did not get the best reviews for image quality.
Afer 5 months with this lens, I love it. Great in the studio, good close up/macro lens and the range make it perfect for general walkround use. I have used it at a wedding and the low light focus is great - much better than the sigma 18-50 2.8.
Highly recomended.
|
|
|
Mar 10, 2006
|
|
cresus
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 24, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 430
|
|
Review Date: Mar 6, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Range
|
|
Cons:
|
Sharpness
|
|
|
I really wanted to like this lens. I had it and the Tamron 28-75 XR Di and went through two copies of the 24-135 before deciding to give up on it. The sharpness of the Tamron was very disappointing. 100% crops were not very good. Maybe this is because I was comparing it to the 28-75 (which is somehow rated lower than this lens by average) but I just couldn't justify keeping it for the extra range. If you only want 1 lens, this is surely better than the Tamron 28-200 or any of the super zooms but for a multi-lens setup I think this is too much of a compromise.
|
|
|
Mar 6, 2006
|
|
NEXC
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 7, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Feb 4, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $369.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Good price.
Excellent color/light rendition (comparable to L class)
Quick AF (reasonable noise level)
Good sharpness (a notch or two below L class)
|
|
Cons:
|
Ackward zoom (a little rough, a little tight)
|
|
Its a notch or two below my Canon 17-40L in terms of brightness and sharpness but it can come really close with a little lightening and sharpening.
Most importantly, and this is what most people don't get about the Canon L class lens: color/light rendition. This lens renders colors and light very close to my L lens. This is much more difficult to mimic in post.
Here is a simple comparison pic, so you can get an idea as to how close these lens are:
http://allang.smugmug.com/gallery/1178544/1/55086231/Large
|
|
|
Feb 4, 2006
|
|
Offline
|
|
Review Date: Feb 2, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $369.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent build quality, good balance, higher then expected optics for a zoom...will add more after few more tests.
|
|
Cons:
|
have yet to discover
|
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 2, 2006
|
|
terrierist
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 31, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Feb 2, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, zoom range, image quality, build quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
This is not really a criticism but more of a comment on a characteristic of this lens: the focusing ring moves as the lens autofocuses. You've got to let it move freely. If you obstruct its movement with your fingers, you'll get soft pictures. I have the feeling that some of the people who criticized this lens weren't able to figure that out.
|
|
|
I bought this lens used but in like new condition to replace my Canon 28-135, whose autofocusing tanked on me for a second time. The seller told me that I could test the lens and return it for a full refund if I was unsatisfied for any reason. After testing it and comparing it to both my Canon 28-135, which would still focus manually, and also to my oldie but goodie Canon 28-80L, I kept the Tamron, which outperformed the 28-135 and came in a respectable 2nd place to the L, which you'd have to expect because of the 3x price differential. Because of its great zoom range, it will now be my main walkaround lens. Focusing is fast and quiet, but not as quiet as Canon's, which are just about totally silent. Very cool, solidly built and versatile lens, especially for the money. Lens hood also snaps on more securely than the Canon 28-135's.
|
|
|
Feb 2, 2006
|
|
emidyl
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 23, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 19
|
|
Review Date: Jan 30, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, perceived build quality, versatility
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
Did lots of research as most have and am happy to say this is one sharp lense. Colour is also fantastic to my eyes. Good feel in terms of quality and feel. Originally wanted a Canon of similar range but could not justify the 2x cost (CDN$) for little to no visual difference. I am fairly new to digital SLR but not to digital so am able to make an informed judgement. Works great on my 20D and the wide range is as wide as I would care to go at this point. The other end works beautifully and provides sufficient overlap for my other soon to be purchased lens. All in all a very good walk-around lense if space is a premium in your bag. Sharp all the way through, user error being the only determinant. Mine has a 50th anniversary emblem on the lense cap if that means anything.
|
|
|
Jan 30, 2006
|
|
hitek79
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Dec 8, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 123
|
|
Review Date: Jan 20, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $329.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
price, picture quality is suberb
|
|
Cons:
|
slow autofocus, but i have nothing but time!
|
|
|
i'm new to photography, and was given a rebel xt for my bday with two very low end lenses, not really knowing how poorly they would perform. this lens has made a huge difference in my pictures. now the only thing that makes them come out bad is user error! i'm out in the mountains almost everyday, and this lens has a great range for nature pictures, and i don't have to lug extra lenses with me all the time. you really can't beat the price either. unless you're wealthy, or your paycheck comes from your pictures, i can't find any reason why you would need to spend more on a lens when something this nice is available.
|
|
|
Jan 20, 2006
|
|
studio56
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 13, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 17, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $213.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
i got this lens after a long studied, i must have read most all reviews online, this tamron 24-135mm is deffinetly a sleeper lens, its so kool , i love it alot...ive sold my canon 28-135mm IS, and nikon 28-105mm , nikon 24-120mm, tokina 24-200mm, to replaced them with this tamron..this tamron 24-135mm is probably only lens you need..of course you'll miss the 200mm, but i like to stay in midrange lens for less barrel distortion..add on with a tokina 80-200mm f2.8, i got myself a great set of lenses. this tamron is a sure shots, i dont see anything wrong with it at all, despired many bad reviews out there, perhaps not all lenses can work with all bodies..i use mine on fuji s2 pro, its works great, very sharp images, nice contrast, great colors..light weigh, compact, good price..great range..fast af..anything else?.. its may be will married to my s2 pro for a long time...nothing is wrong with this lens..i strongly suggest any one who wants a 1 lens does all..great for weddings, and parties..works great with my flash for indoor shots too..
it comes with hood and a pouch..very nice touch..its the sp model, stand for super performance..with gold ring on zoom ring, to say its series..
im happy and settle for this, its may be best in its range..
im tempting on buy the sigma 24-135mm f2.8 too..
oh!, btw, i also got the tamron 28-105mm f2.8, its another killer..very pro like series..i love it too..
cheers.
jv
|
|
Cons:
|
my only grip is for those who had bad experience with this lens, donno what to say, but i got myself a great deal, i paid 213$ on ebay..new is about 300$, i love mine..
|
|
|
read above review...
im very happy with this lens..
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2006
|
|
kjhayes007
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 28, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 108
|
|
Review Date: Jan 7, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, great contrast, excellent build quality, just feels superb, great price.
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
Well, I did a lot of research before buying my Tamron 24-135, and this lens has not disappointed me. For $370 I have a fantasticly sharp, high contrast, solid quality lens with a great range. This is my first non-Canon lens, and shooting with it has been nothing less than delightful; I feel it is better than anything else near this price range, to include Canon's IS lens. (A lot of those have been up for sale lately...) My Tamron's zoom ring is quite tight, but with every time I use it, it feels a little better. This is my official walk around lens now, what more can be said than that? If you have been on the fence regarding this lense, fear not young fighter, this is an inexpensive solid performer.
|
|
|
Jan 7, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
48
|
232708
|
Mar 15, 2012
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
85% of reviewers
|
$322.33
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.93
|
9.36
|
8.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
