Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 V tamron 24-70 f/2.8 vc
- Thread starter iwols
- Start date
- Messages
- 3,781
- Name
- Alex
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Do you shoot crop or full frame? On a crop they are much of a much ness as both hit the sweet spot advantage. If your on full frame and like to shoot wide open the vc model is a big improvement. Add in the much better af motor and the extra 4mm width and I'd take the vc version.
Gary Coyle
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Ive owned both Tamrons and the Nikon 24-70mm, neither of the 24-70mm lenses were worth the money compared to the 28-75mm so they got sold
OP
- Messages
- 872
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks I'm on ff
OP
- Messages
- 872
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Cheers that's thrown the cat in the pigeons
- Messages
- 2,538
- Edit My Images
- No
Personally I found the Tamron 28-75 to be noticeably softer at 2.8 than the Nikon. Above that there really was nothing in it without pixel peeping. Never used the Tamron 24-70 but I've heard very good things about it.
So I guess it comes down to how much you need the ability to shoot sharp at 2.8 and build quality. I actually regret selling my 28-75. It made the perfect walkabout family lens.
So I guess it comes down to how much you need the ability to shoot sharp at 2.8 and build quality. I actually regret selling my 28-75. It made the perfect walkabout family lens.
- Messages
- 7,954
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've not used the 28-75 but it does get rave reviews on here especially considering its price, I do have the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC, having sold one a month ago I missed it and decided I was willing to trade a bit of weight for image quality, I used my previous one for about 90% of my shots last year and loved it, I suspect its replacement will again be on my D800 the vast majority of the time, great IQ, the VC is excellent and I find the build to be very good (certainly better than similarly priced Nikon lenses like the 16-35 f4 VR) although I've never used the Nikon 24-70 f2.8 which I'm sure is a bit better (and dearer!)
- Messages
- 67
- Name
- Dewan Demmer
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The 28-75 vs 24-70 ... Fill the same space but cater to it diferently.
I have had 2 28-75 lenses and have the 24-70 ( Tamron ).
I actually still have one 28-75 as a backup ( it got dropped and the edge of the frame chipped off, although it still works perfectly even after it had 2 KG's with of camer and equipment behind it on the fall )
The Tamron 24-70 is much heavier and a lot bigger
The Tamron 28-75 is thus light and compact.
Image Quality:
I did loads of test, and then a whole lot more and the 24-70 had a definate clarity and better image quality over the 28-75, however this is only when I start to really start to zoom in on the photos in Lightroom or Photoshop/Gimp or whatever you use to edit.
Tamron 24-70 (4/5)
Tamron 28-75 (3/5)
Build Quality :
The 24-70 is a solid piece of equipment and you it really feels like it belongs on a high end camera. ( 5/5 )
The 28-75 feels like its a good quality, but can develop a little give and have a rattle or 2 when shaking. (3/5)
Low light :
The 28-75 struggles a little more than the 24-70 with this although no lens is perfect and lower the light, the lest the contrast the more then lens will struggle.
Tamron 24-70 (4/5)
Tamron 28-75 (3/5)
Value for Money :
The 2 lenses are both excellent value especially when compared anything else in the range. The 28-75 may not be the top tier , but the price really makes up for it since you can easily buy 2 of them and still have change for lunch when compared to the 24-70mm
Tamron 24-70 (4/5)
Tamron 28-75 (5/5)
PS: I consider the 24-70 to a sharper lens with overall better images quality.
This is all my opinion and may vary due to wind conditions, the tides and whether or not I left the seat up.
I have had 2 28-75 lenses and have the 24-70 ( Tamron ).
I actually still have one 28-75 as a backup ( it got dropped and the edge of the frame chipped off, although it still works perfectly even after it had 2 KG's with of camer and equipment behind it on the fall )
The Tamron 24-70 is much heavier and a lot bigger
The Tamron 28-75 is thus light and compact.
Image Quality:
I did loads of test, and then a whole lot more and the 24-70 had a definate clarity and better image quality over the 28-75, however this is only when I start to really start to zoom in on the photos in Lightroom or Photoshop/Gimp or whatever you use to edit.
Tamron 24-70 (4/5)
Tamron 28-75 (3/5)
Build Quality :
The 24-70 is a solid piece of equipment and you it really feels like it belongs on a high end camera. ( 5/5 )
The 28-75 feels like its a good quality, but can develop a little give and have a rattle or 2 when shaking. (3/5)
Low light :
The 28-75 struggles a little more than the 24-70 with this although no lens is perfect and lower the light, the lest the contrast the more then lens will struggle.
Tamron 24-70 (4/5)
Tamron 28-75 (3/5)
Value for Money :
The 2 lenses are both excellent value especially when compared anything else in the range. The 28-75 may not be the top tier , but the price really makes up for it since you can easily buy 2 of them and still have change for lunch when compared to the 24-70mm
Tamron 24-70 (4/5)
Tamron 28-75 (5/5)
PS: I consider the 24-70 to a sharper lens with overall better images quality.
This is all my opinion and may vary due to wind conditions, the tides and whether or not I left the seat up.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 803
- Edit My Images
- No
Never tried the 28-75 but I am well pleased with the 24-70 VC on my Canon 6D. Focus is fast and accurate, build quality is good and the VC works as well as any Canon/Nikon stabilised lenses I have tried. Wide open the images are extremely sharp in the centre and distortion plus vignetting is well controlled. For the money not much can touch it.
- Messages
- 983
- Edit My Images
- No
Bare in mind size and value are also issues for a lot of people. The Tamron is less a lens that's been "surpassed" and more a lens that offers something different to the newer 24-70mm's.
Not used the 28-75mm but looking at most reviews them seem to agree that the real advantage of the 24-70mm in terms of sharpness is at the wide end, at 70/75mm there doesn't seem to be a massive amount between them but the lower you go the better the 24-70mm is across the frame wide open and in the boarders stopped down.
Then of course you have the difference in range and stabilisation.
- Messages
- 3,781
- Name
- Alex
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This is a really good way of looking at it I replaced my 28-75mm tamron with the canon 24-105mm f4l for general walk about use as the extra width and length the canon offers appealed to my shooting style. I do however quite often consider getting another tamron it was so light and versatile and offered great performance for the money! I've considered all the 24-70mm f2.8 zooms and the sheer size and cost puts me off!
If tamron could add there new AF motor to the 28-75mm without to much cost/size increase I'd have one!
Last edited:
- Messages
- 983
- Edit My Images
- No
I can especially see the draw for using it with something like the 6D, your talking 300g difference to the 24-70mm VC.
- Messages
- 100
- Name
- Martin
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I am considering 28-75 for my 6D as I am looking to shrink my lens numbers and costs. It's really appealing to me because the relatively compact size, fast aperture, good price, long warranty and reports of fair IQ. I am just wondering about the auto-focus. I know it won't be up to USM type of motors, but is it good enough for general usage?