Help please.... Nikon 24-70

Messages
4,922
Name
Kev
Edit My Images
Yes
#1
Hi

I am after some help and opinions please.....

So I have a D750, Nikon 28-105 and also a Tamron 28-75 F2.8, I have not shot much at F2.8, but have an itch to try out a Nikon 24-70 f2.8 as want to upgrade from my Tamron and people say that the picture quality of the Nikon is very good. I mainly use the camera to take photos of my children or use it at family parties etc, so am no pro.

I know the 24-70 is very heavy compared to my Tamron, and also have the option to get a Tamron, but having read various QC issues on Tamron, I do not want to get a used one that I am not happy with, an do not want to spend to buy a new one.

I know the first version of the Tamron can be had for about £650 which is what I would pay for a used 24-70, so what would you all nice people of the forum suggest.

1. Stick to what I have
2. Buy a used Nikon 24-70

Thank you for your help.

Kev
 
Messages
1,863
Name
Alastair
Edit My Images
Yes
#3
Hi

I am after some help and opinions please.....

So I have a D750, Nikon 28-105 and also a Tamron 28-75 F2.8, I have not shot much at F2.8, but have an itch to try out a Nikon 24-70 f2.8 as want to upgrade from my Tamron and people say that the picture quality of the Nikon is very good. I mainly use the camera to take photos of my children or use it at family parties etc, so am no pro.

I know the 24-70 is very heavy compared to my Tamron, and also have the option to get a Tamron, but having read various QC issues on Tamron, I do not want to get a used one that I am not happy with, an do not want to spend to buy a new one.

I know the first version of the Tamron can be had for about £650 which is what I would pay for a used 24-70, so what would you all nice people of the forum suggest.

1. Stick to what I have
2. Buy a used Nikon 24-70

Thank you for your help.

Kev
Used to have the Tamron years ago, got the Nikon now in my second iteration of owning a DSLR. The Tamron was a great lens and great value for money. The Nikon is basically as good as you can get for that sort of lens.

What is your current Tamron lens not doing or performing that you'd want it to?
 
Last edited:
Messages
6,258
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
No
#4
I view the Nikon 24-70 2.8 is the old faithful of this sort of range. You don't really get 'bad copies' as such' like you often see reported with other lenses. It's built to go on and on and will more or less hold it's value so it's an easy enough purchase to justify. Image quality is excellent and there are no real vices to speak of. I've just got another of them having weighed up a few different options. Was tempted by the newest Tamron G2 but in the end was offered a Nikon at a price that was too hard to turn down.

Oh, should have mentioned, the Nikon 24-70 does have one Achilles heel. It is f'ing huge and it's got even bigger with the VR version. It's a lot larger than the Canon and Sony equivalents and totally dwarfs the third party ones. Whether you see that as a downside, upside or an irrelevance is up to you but it's certainly worth bearing in mind.
 
Last edited:

StewartR

Efrem Zimbalist Jr
Advertiser
Messages
11,803
Name
Stewart
Edit My Images
Yes
#5
I have not shot much at F2.8, but have an itch to try out a Nikon 24-70 f2.8 ....
It seems there may be a disconnect between what you want and what you will use. So buy what you want, it won't make any difference to your pictures, but it won't hurt, and you'll have a new shiny shiny to admire.
 
Messages
13,351
Edit My Images
No
#6
I've never shot with the Tamron lens, but I'm a little on the fence with the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8. AF speed is super fast, build quality it superb and it will last a lifetime. However, outright sharpness has never blown me away (I've had three copies). It's very good, but I was just expecting it to be as good as the 70-200mm f2.8 so maybe my expectations were too high. It's still probably the best 24-70mmm f2.8 you can get for Nikon though, and it does render very nicely indeed.
 
Last edited:
Messages
6,258
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
No
#7
I've never shot with the Tamron lens, but I'm a little on the fence with the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8. AF speed is super fast, build quality it superb and it will last a lifetime. However, outright sharpness has never blown me away (I've had three copies). It's very good, but I was just expecting it to be as good as the 70-200mm f2.8 so maybe my expectations were too high. It's still probably the best 24-70mmm f2.8 you can get for Nikon though.
Yep, never been bowled over by any lens like this but I think they're just a tool aren't they. Some lenses do magical things but 24-70's are work horses, a bit unexciting but just get the job done.
 
Messages
16,875
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
#8
Yep, never been bowled over by any lens like this but I think they're just a tool aren't they. Some lenses do magical things but 24-70's are work horses, a bit unexciting but just get the job done.
Couldn't agree more. A great lens to have. Mine works best in it's mid range but the very short end (24-28mm) and long end (62-70mm) the corners are a lot softer. Useable but it's best in it's mid point. It's about the one lens I would keep if I had to have just one.
 
Messages
8,126
Name
wayne clarke
Edit My Images
Yes
#9
It's a good lens, but it's not a great lens IMHO, it's famously soft in the corners, which is fine for portraits but not good if you need detail at the edges, it's better stopped down but then so are some cheap lens.
 
Messages
13,351
Edit My Images
No
#10
It's a good lens, but it's not a great lens IMHO, it's famously soft in the corners, which is fine for portraits but not good if you need detail at the edges, it's better stopped down but then so are some cheap lens.
Tbh the softness in the corners wide open doesn't bother me, as if I'm shooting wide open it's usually of a subject that I want to isolate anyway. For landscapes I obviously stop down (usually to f8-11) in which case the corners are perfectly acceptable imo. I guess it depends how and what you shoot (y)
 
Messages
22,917
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
#11
There are two versions of the Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC which are optically the same, and two versions of the Nikon which are completely different. The Mk2 Nikon adds image stabilisation and marginally improved optics but loses the rather cool 'zooming lens hood' feature. In terms of optical performance they run Tamron, Nikon Mk1 and Nikon Mk2 and the difference is mainly in edge sharpness but don't expect miracles or even to notice anything significant in real world use. Of the Nikons, VR will probably make most difference.

A lot of the Nikons' cost goes into robust pro-spec build quality. In terms of value, Tamron wins easily with the original version still available for £660.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
sep9001
Messages
4,922
Name
Kev
Edit My Images
Yes
#12
Thank you all the comments, suggestions and help.

I have not been happy with the sharpness of the Tamron I have, when I bought it was back focusing so sent in to Tamron who found an issue and fixed it, at that stage I was using it with my D90, so could not do any adjustment in camera. The reason I was not happy with the sharpness was because the Tamron 17-50 that I used with the same body was very sharp.

Having adjust the lens setting on my D750 I am still not sure it is as sharp past 50mm, now this may be down to my user error, but has got me thinking about upgrading to the Nikon....

Just need to think if I want to spend the money or just stick with what I have....
 
Messages
16,875
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
#13
It's a good lens, but it's not a great lens IMHO, it's famously soft in the corners, which is fine for portraits but not good if you need detail at the edges, it's better stopped down but then so are some cheap lens.
Mines perfect edge to edge but only from 40-62mm...acceptable from 32mm to 40mm IMHO
 
Messages
1,358
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
Yes
#14
I would echo the comments above, it’s a very good jack of all trades but perhaps master of none. That might sound a little harsher than I intended as I truly love mine, the photographs always look good out of it. I took it on a family holiday last week to which it performed excellently, easily keeping up with my very active 2 year old daughter.

While it’s not as sharp as say a Sigma Art prime, it is still pretty damn sharp. I’ve never worried about 2.8 being soft, but f4 onwards is excellent. AF is the fastest and most accurate I’ve used, but then my other lenses aren’t speed demons. No adjustment necessary either.

Also as said above it is a bit of a beast, I’m not sure how it compares to the tamron though personally.
 
OP
OP
sep9001
Messages
4,922
Name
Kev
Edit My Images
Yes
#19
Thank you all for the suggestion and help, have now bought one off a forum member. Now just need to get out and use it..
 
Top