24-70 F2.8 Tamron vs Nikon

Sootchucker

Sootchucker

Messages
2,533
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
No
Hi all. Just wondering if anyone had any thoughts on the above. I currently have a couple of Nikon Bodies (D4, D750), and am just thinking I'm not getting the very best from my Nikon 24-120 F4 VR, so looking to offload that and pickup again a standard F2.8 zoom.

I had the Nikon version a few years ago and whilst it was stellar from an image quality POV, it was a very large and heavy lens (especially with the hood on), which is why i have been looking at alternatives. The Tamron 24-70 F2.8 DI VC USD seems also a very attractive alternative (with VC to boot), and seems to get very good reviews (DXO Mark even place it above the Nikon version).

Downsides seem to be quite heavy Vignetting wide open, but other than that seems on paper to be quite a solid performer and is a good deal cheaper than the Nikon (and with a 5 year warranty), although price isn't necessarily a driver - it does help.

Has anyone any experience of these two and can provide comments please ?
 
Last edited:
I've just sold my Tamron to invest in primes again but its a cracker of a lens I loved it to bits and it did 99% of my shooting last year, you will get folk saying that the Tamron QC isn't as good but you get a 5 year warranty, just make sure you buy from somewhere you can swap it if you get a duff one! I'd highly recommend it, I'm almost having a little sellers remorse on mine already!
 
I own the tamron 24-70 2.8 and it's incredible. Bought from digrev for less than £700.
 
I think it was Gary Coyle who, having had both, rated the Tamron over the Nikon.
 
I had the N24-70. Never used the Tamron 24-70 (but only heard positives about it). Here is a nice comparison:

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_vs_Tamron_24-70mm_comparison/

Perhaps unless you are a pro wedding photographer or a photojournalist think about getting one or two primes instead. Often f/1.8 means more flexibility than a zoom. These modern 1.8G or 1.4G primes are better optically than N24-70. Especially in corners.
 
I use the Tamron 24-70mm on a Canon 60d and I love it. More than happy with the IQ and sharpness. Any vignette can be removed in seconds in post processing, but I often keep it - personal style. Most zooms are going to be a little softer at the maximum length, but I'm happy with mine at 200; quite like to use it at 135mm on my crop for portraits. I've also got the Tamron 24-70mm f2.8, during my research both got great reviews.
 
I'm happy with my N24-70, not used the Tamron but mainly shoot stopped down between F8 and F16. Its a useful travel lens. The lens is expensive but sharp at 100% view on a D800. Good in the corners too...stopped down.
 
I have both lenses and am more than happy with both. The Tamron was supposed to be a backup in case I had a problem with the Nikon on a shoot but its lighter weight often makes it the first choice lens of the two. The previous, non-VC, version of the lens could be a bit hit and miss as far as sharpness went but I think they've sorted that issue out with this version. I wouldn't hesitate to get another.
 
nikon 24-70 every time if its quality images your after
had the Tamron and sold it after 1 month just not quality at all. also vc does not help with a moving object only lens movement
 
The one that Gary Coyle (and myself) is referring to is the older 28-75 non BIM f2.8. It's very light and gives decent results.

I think he'll say it's 98% as good as the nikkor 24-70 but for 20% of the price.

I've used 3 and have been delighted with the image quality of them all!

I think you have to get them second hand now.
 
Sir SR said:
The one that Gary Coyle (and myself) is referring to is the older 28-75 non BIM f2.8. It's very light and gives decent results.

I think he'll say it's 98% as good as the nikkor 24-70 but for 20% of the price.

I've used 3 and have been delighted with the image quality of them all!

I think you have to get them second hand now.
Click to expand...

I have also had the newer one (with motor) which I found great. For new, Panamoz still have them in stock along with Ffordes, who also have some second hand ones starting from £189.00.

New > http://www.ffordes.com/product/100723163510663
SH > http://www.ffordes.com/product/14121815332631
 
Ok guys, I've decided to bite the bullet and get another 24-70 F2.8 lens and its between these two.

Due to price my heart says get the Tamron, especially after nearly every online review rates it as highly (or higher) optically than the Nikkor, however there's one thing holding me back. I've also heard that Tamron's QC isn't the best and a number have said it took them 3 or 4 copies to get a good one, but when you do get a good one its stellar.

For those that have purchased the Tamron 24-70 F2.8 DI VC USD (in either Canon on Nikon mounts), can you share your experiences and if you got a good one first time round, or had to return some copies to get a good one. This determines I guess where I decided to get one from as they might need to have a good returns policy ?
 
Sootchucker said:
For those that have purchased the Tamron 24-70 F2.8 DI VC USD (in either Canon on Nikon mounts), can you share your experiences and if you got a good one first time round, or had to return some copies to get a good one. This determines I guess where I decided to get one from as they might need to have a good returns policy ?
Click to expand...

Wasn't this already covered?
 
I am confused by your initial statement that the lens was "stellar from an image quality POV, it was a very large and heavy lens (especially with the hood on)" yet you have it on a Pro D4 body. Not the lightest of combinations. Are you not just stepping right back to where you started from? Such bodies/lenses are heavy by their nature.
 
OldCarlos said:
I think it was Gary Coyle who, having had both, rated the Tamron over the Nikon.
Click to expand...
I had the 28-75mm mate, which even at that low price point i rate better than the vastly over rated and over priced Nikon 24-70mm, this is one Nikon lens which needs an update, yes, yes, i know thousands of people earn a good living from this lens but its poor value by todays standards.
 
Gary Coyle said:
I had the 28-75mm mate, which even at that low price point i rate better than the vastly over rated and over priced Nikon 24-70mm, this is one Nikon lens which needs an update, yes, yes, i know thousands of people earn a good living from this lens but its poor value by todays standards.
Click to expand...


This is true, the 28-75 can be excellent. But the only issue I found is getting a good one. A couple of years ago I went through 3 to get a decent copy.

I've just purchased another one last week and it's going back as it's really poor.

But if you manage to get a good one they're great!
 
Last edited:
EspressoJunkie said:
This is true, the 28-75 can be excellent. But the only issue I found is getting a good one. A couple of years ago I went through 3 to get a decent copy.

I've just purchased another one last week and it's going back as it's really poor.

But if you manage to get a good one they're great!
Click to expand...
Never had the issue myself Greg, didnt i sell you one of mine??????
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top