Tamron 24-70 VC vs Nikon 28-70

T

twist

Messages
17,878
Edit My Images
No
Looking at purchasing one of these two lenses, anyone have any opinions as to which is better and why?

Thanks
 
twist said:
Looking at purchasing one of these two lenses, anyone have any opinions as to which is better and why?

Thanks
Click to expand...

I looked at both of these before buying the Nikon 24-70. While the Tamron will be good if you get a good copy the Nikon 28-70 is great optically. V.C is really not a concern at this sort of focal length.

I was put of the Tamron due to the range of issues it suffers from when I read through the online reviews etc. left focus issues, front and back focusing etc. If you decide to go with the Tamron I would suggest buying it somewere that you can easily return for replacement if neccesary. In terms of I.Q it is not as good as the Nikon 28-70 or the 24-70.

For me, it made sense just to pay the extra for the Nikon 24-70. In terms of the optics I probably didn't gain anything I wouldn't have got from the 28-70. If you can get one of these at decent money I am sure you won't regret it. I would of have gone for one of these myself only at the time there didn't seem to be a huge price difference between the 2. The used cost difference was around £250.00.

If you are looking on a budget the Tamron 28-75 seems to be well received especially the one without the built in motor.
 
Last edited:
Was thinking about the 28-75 but build quality and low light AF would be an issue (non BIM is also impossible to find), so thought Id spend a bit more, just cant stretch to the 24-70. Thanks for taking the time to reply.
 
twist said:
Was thinking about the 28-75 but build quality and low light AF would be an issue (non BIM is also impossible to find), so thought Id spend a bit more, just cant stretch to the 24-70. Thanks for taking the time to reply.
Click to expand...

As far as I am aware the non BIM version does not hunt as much as the one with the motor in low light. They pop up on ebay quite regularly.

Example

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/TAMRON-28...60158419?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item1c2fbf6bd3

If you would really rather have the Nikon 24-70, I would suggest waiting until your budget allows. I have fallen into this trap before myself, if you buy any of the the other options you will only end up still wanting to upgrade.
 
Last edited:
Seriously, whats wrong with build quality, sure its no Nikon but if you dont chuck it off a building it'll be fine, ive also never had any low light issues either, could be more down to the AF on the body as i use D3S/D800
 
I'm afraid I have no experience of the Tamron, I guess very few people do at this stage. Reviews look promising though.

I do have a bit of experience of both the Nikon 24-70 and 28-70 2.8's though. The 24-70 is a great lens but if I were buying again, I'd save some money and go for the 28-70. Optically I can see no difference though I think I'm right in saying the 24-70 has nano crystal coating which I understand helps with flare. I can't say I noticed that to be a particular issue with the 28-70 anyway though. I prefer the build of the 28-70 and though you lose 4mm at the wider end to the 24-70, I never felt that the 24-70 was at its best there anyway so no big deal in my opinion. The biggest thing in the 28-70's favour is of course the cost saving, should be about £300 cheaper than a 24-70. Bear in mind though that since the 24-70 replaced the 28-70, all 28-70's are getting on a bit now and though they're built well, things can go wrong. My first one had a loose zoom ring and I've heard tales of focus motors dying as well. Maybe worth buying from a used retailer who offers a warranty just in case.
 
As you know Im on my second copy of the Tamron 24-70, the first had issues with the VC system.
For what its worth i think its a great lens, much better than the old 28-75 f/2.8 that i used to own. Both might be as sharp but the focusing system is much better on the newer lens.
Seeing as the big deal about this lens is it has VC 'id use your own judgement about if its useful or not, but according to most owners (myself included) and reviewers it is, even at 24mm.
 
Thanks for all the advice guys, Dave/Gary can you please PM me with some links shot at F2.8?
 
No problem. To be honest I don't tend to shoot much at f/2.8, I find the DOF can be a bit too narrow for some things but its great having it and the shots are pretty sharp.

If you want any raw files let me know. All my shots online have been processed so its hard to get a real idea of how sharp they are out of camera, but IMO its the finished result that matters anyway.
 
twist said:
Ha, nice shot. Looks sharp enough to me. Do you add sharpening in LR?
Click to expand...

Thanks, yes, its sharp enough. I do add sharpening in LR but not a lot, especially not on the higher ISO shots.

Im struggling with shooting this little fella at the moment. For some reason i cant get him as sharp with this lens as i can with my others, i think he must be moving slightly as all the focus tests ive done with this lens confirms its working fine.
This is my second lens and i had the same trouble with the first. It must be me rather than the equipment though, but its strange as i dont normally have problems with people shots.
 
Maybe the VC, read something strange that its disabled above 1/60? Not sure if you seen anything like that.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
Maybe the VC, read something strange that its disabled above 1/60? Not sure if you seen anything like that.

Right guys get your votes in, imported VC for £700 or mint 28-70 with 6 month dealer warranty for £650?
Click to expand...

I can hear the VC running even at 1/1000 shutter speed (not that its needed, i just did a quick check). I do tend to turn it off if more now, but it wasn't that.
Its more that i focus on his eyes, make sure its all confirmed yet the eyes come out a bit soft. His collar or ears (for example are sharper). could be a contrast thing but with my 50mm or 100mm prime it works more consistently, even at f/2 at 100mm.
Im sure ill figure it out.

My vote is the Tamron but only because i have no idea about the Nikon, so its very biased. Saying that id prefer 24mm over 28mm on the wide end, but thats just me. I prefer to shoot wider so i can crop in later and avoid some of the edge distortion.
 
Sounds like a back focus issue, have you tried a small micro adjust to see if its any better?

For me the 4mm makes no difference.
 
What concerns me more is the quality control of the Tamron, I need to get sharp shots of a moving toddler, theres no such luxury as "sit while daddy takes a picture of you" so your experience is kind of steering me away. Id imagine the Nikon will also hold its value better and I wouldnt lose any money if I decided to sell.
 
twist said:
Sounds like a back focus issue, have you tried a small micro adjust to see if its any better?

For me the 4mm makes no difference.
Click to expand...

Thats the thing. Ive run a few AF tests, VC on/VC off etc and everything seems to check out fine. No MFA needed. I have tried some MFA either way but it just makes things worse so im sure my lens doesn't need it.
Ive still to use FoCal, im sure that will throw up soem info but so far i cant find any AF issues other than when shooting people. Im pretty sure its down to my technique, maybe i move slightly at the very last min, or i might nudge the zoom ring a bit. I need to analyse whats going wrong.

I do find i reach for my primes when im shooting fast moving shots in low light, but that might be because i feel more comfortable doing this. I think the Tamron is fine, it can keep up using AI Servo outdoors but it does feel sluggish compared to my USM lenses. Ive had a lot worse over the years and my main subject has been my youngest son. Actually if im honest i have tended to use bounced flash for most shots indoors, although since getting my 5DMKIII ive go ta bit lazier and tend to use the higher ISO more these days.
 
Interesting, so its just with "moving" subjects. As you say you may just be used to the focus accuracy of your USM primes.
 
twist said:
Interesting, so its just with "moving" subjects. As you say you may just be used to the focus accuracy of your USM primes.
Click to expand...

Well i so tell him to stop moving and he doesn't look like he is, thats the strange thing. Dont get me wrong, the shots are ok once output from LR most of the time, like the one i posted above, but i would expect them to be a little better sometimes.
 
Only things it could be is a nudge of the zoom or shutter speeds to slow, or the AF isnt accurate in lower light.
 
Shutter speed is fine, AF could be off but it seems like the focal plane has shifted very slightly. Guess it could be the low light throwing the AF.
Not now considering the MKII as i also ordered a Canon S110 to replace my lost S95, and have to give my daughter some money for her wedding so im skint now lol.
 
Nice share, in a situation like that VC is extremely useful, I noticed you do a fair bit of landscape, so a good choice. I mainly take photos of moving kids/portraits so VC etc is less important, bokeh/colour/contrast more so.

I was very undecided but have gone for the Nikon for reasons discussed, thanks for replying Dave, been a great help.
 
Glad to have helped in some way. Im sure the Nikon will work out well.

whenever i buy a lens i always make sure it will cover most of my shooting habits. I cant afford to buy a lens for just one type of shooting but do make sure it covers the main one, in this case shooting everything. Most of the time i can do without VC/IS but when i go out at night id rather have a stabilised lens than take a tripod, especially around my area where you do get hassled a lot by security guards.


Good luck with the new lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top