Tamron 28-75mm compared to the Nikon 24-70

Dman

Dman

Messages
3,656
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
No
Now, I know this may sound a stupid thing to try and compare, but my situation is as follows.

I've got two bodies, a D700 and D90. I'm saving to go for FX lenses, a 24-70 and 70-200. I've always salivated over the thought of a D700/24-70 combo, but when I buy this, it'll be a good while before I can afford the 70-200.

So, has anyone owned both the Tamron and Nikon lenses and used them on a full frame body? Common sense would say to buy the 70-200 and use the Tamron as a stop gap until I can afford the Nikon, but if the differences are that far apart, I'll get the 24-70 first, as I always have the basic 55-200 Nikon to use on the D90 if I need the extra reach, especially as it's not a range in which I tend to shoot too often.
 
Hi Dave, not much help- I bought the Tamron 28-75mm about 2 years ago and was amazed by the quality of the images in comparison to the f3.5/4.5 lenses I used. Then last month I got a new Nikon 24-70mm and Wow, it blows the Tamron away. The IQ is noticeably better, but then at 3 times the cost you would expect it to. I also own the Nikon 70-200mm VR mK1 but used on a D300. I have noticed the focussing is near instantaneous with the Nikons (Due to the HSM ) All I can say is the Tamron is a good stop gap for the price, but the Nikons are the way to go. Rob
 
Considered the Tammy when I got my D700. Went for the Nikkor 28-70 2.8 in the end. Fabulous. So happy.
I don't do much at the wide end, can be found for £600+. Very good value.
 
The Tamron is without doubt an excellent lens, but there's still a huge difference in quality between the two. The Nikon 24-70 is just unbelievable in every department. Image quality is much better on the Nikon (though the Tamron is still an excellent performer) but the biggest advantage the Nikon has over the Tamron is the auto-focus. It's just the best of any lens I've ever used. Hits the mark every time and amazingly quick.

You said yourself that you don't shoot much in the longer focal lengths so common sense says put your money in the range that you do.
 
Last edited:
feek said:
Hi Dave, not much help- I bought the Tamron 28-75mm about 2 years ago and was amazed by the quality of the images in comparison to the f3.5/4.5 lenses I used. Then last month I got a new Nikon 24-70mm and Wow, it blows the Tamron away. The IQ is noticeably better, but then at 3 times the cost you would expect it to. I also own the Nikon 70-200mm VR mK1 but used on a D300. I have noticed the focussing is near instantaneous with the Nikons (Due to the HSM ) All I can say is the Tamron is a good stop gap for the price, but the Nikons are the way to go. Rob
Click to expand...

Cheers, I thought that would be the case, I think as I use this range the most, it's probably worth diving straight in and letting the Tamron go.


trevorbray said:
Considered the Tammy when I got my D700. Went for the Nikkor 28-70 2.8 in the end. Fabulous. So happy.
I don't do much at the wide end, can be found for £600+. Very good value.
Click to expand...

I did consider this, but then it leaves me in a position whereby for £300 more, I can pick up a second hand 24-70, so I think I may as well just do that.
 
Lazlo Woodbine said:
The Tamron is without doubt an excellent lens, but there's still a huge difference in quality between the two. The Nikon 24-70 is just unbelievable in every department. Image quality is much better on the Nikon (though the Tamron is still an excellent performer) but the biggest advantage the Nikon has over the Tamron is the auto-focus. It's just the best of any lens I've ever used. Hits the mark every time and amazingly quick.

You said yourself that you don't shoot much in the longer focal lengths so common sense says put your money in the range that you do.
Click to expand...

That's cemented it then :D
 
I have the 70-200VR and the Tamron 28-75 on my D300. The Tamron is my least used lens (also have a 50mm 1.4). IQ is good and better than previous lenses but not quite as good as the others. To be fair that is me being very picky, at a glance it is hard to tell which lens was used, its only when you crop and pixel peep it is apparent.

By all accounts the Nikon is better made, more solid, faster AF and slightly better IQ. That said, you can get approx. 4 Tamrons 2nd hand for the cost of 1 Nikon! In terms of value for money the Tamron wins hands down, but the Nikon is the better having spent ages looking at this a year ago or so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top