Tamron or Nikon wide zoom for D700...

jimbo_wa

jimbo_wa

Messages
606
Name
James Cowell
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi
I currently have a Nikon 24-120 VR and am fed up of 'soft' images, so I'm looking to get either the Tamron SP AF17-35MM F/2.8-4 Di or Nikon 18-35 f/3.5-4.5D IF-ED.

They both seem to be well respected (within price bracket) but I cannot find a comparison anywhere, my gut is the Tamron for speed and the Nikon for sharpness.

This is to be partnered with a D700 - other lenses are a nifty fifty and 70-300 VR.

General shots ranging from landscapes/buildings (I enjoy crazy distortions) and detailed close-ups - not true macro.

Cheers
James
 
I have no idea about the two lenses you mentioned .. but I used to have a 24-120VR and it wasn't all that bad.

As for what lens to get, I'd strongly suggest you have a look at the 17-35AF-S or the 35-70.
 
Thanks Wail
I definately want the wider end so the 35-70 wouldn't do it (I used to have the old push/pull 35-70 f/2.8 and it was a great lens) and the 17-35 is about £1k more than I have to spend!

The 24-120 isn't awful like some of the reviews state, but I am finding that my images look soft when viewed critically.
 
How about buying 2nd hand?

I know many wouldn't want to do that, for various reasons, but I've been very happy with a few bits that I've bought 2nd-hand over the past year or so. May be worth the try?
 
No problems buying second hand - it's just finding someone willing to sell at a price that is acceptable to both parties!
 
The Tamron 17-50 is a DX lens & will be cropped on the FX sensor. I had the Tamron 17-35 which was a good lens on my D3. Still available for a very good proce from Mifsuds. I paid £150 just before Christmas. Recently went to a good home on here after a trade with a Nikon 17-35 + cash.

Chris :)
 
Chris - thank you for pointing out the bleeding obvious, thought the Tamron was too good to be true!!

The 17-35 looks like it has taken its place (OP amended)
 
jimbo_wa said:
They both seem to be well respected (within price bracket) but I cannot find a comparison anywhere, my gut is the Tamron for speed and the Nikon for sharpness.
Click to expand...

I've done this over on Nikon Cafe.

Tamron wins.

If you want a decent wide consider in this order:

Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 AF-S, Tamron 17-35 f/2.8 -> Nikkor 18-35

The Tamron 17-35 is hard to fault for the money, the Nikkor 17-35 is the best for corner sharpness. The 18-35 isn't good enough IMHO.
 
Ta Puddleduck - looks like the Tamron is the likely candidate.

Prices seem to have shot up over the last 6 months, is there anywhere selling them for under £200 anymore?
 
jimbo_wa said:
Prices seem to have shot up over the last 6 months, is there anywhere selling them for under £200 anymore?
Click to expand...

Complaining about the price of a cheap(ish) lens when he has a 1600 quid camera body :LOL:

No, cheapest I have seen is just over 200 notes.
 
jimbo_wa said:
Ta Puddleduck - looks like the Tamron is the likely candidate.

Prices seem to have shot up over the last 6 months, is there anywhere selling them for under £200 anymore?
Click to expand...

Actually for the optics, £200 is a great price.
 
Yeah, yeah - I know, but to be totally frank I do not want to lug around heavy/expensive lenses when lighter/cheaper gets me 95% of the shots I want to take.

I also have a history of dropping things and in my bitter experience, bodies hold up better than the lens in that scenario... :bonk:
 
jimbo_wa said:
Yeah, yeah - I know, but to be totally frank I do not want to lug around heavy/expensive lenses when lighter/cheaper gets me 95% of the shots I want to take.

I also have a history of dropping things and in my bitter experience, bodies hold up better than the lens in that scenario... :bonk:
Click to expand...

The 18-35mm Nikon is not a lens for dropping, believe me. I saw one on eBay last month, which sold for just 156 quid because it had been dropped and half of the protruding filter holder had snapped off :(.

I'll be selling my 18-35mm shortly (as I've just picked up a minty Nikon 17-35mm :love:), but as I paid over the odds for it (340 quid, 3 months ago), I won't be looking to "give it away". It's certainly very light and looks OK on the D700, but I've no experience with the Tamron :shrug:.

Good luck, whatever you decide to do (y).
 
You say the images are 'soft' on the 24-120. I've had no problems with mine. Have you tried using the AF fine tune in the Setup menu to adjust the focus?
 
The 24-120 VR can be very variable - I used 4 copies, 3 were absolute junk.

The latest one I have is good (sharp wide open at 24mm, and sharp @ 120)
 
puddleduck said:
£340!!!

That's half a 17-35 f/2.8 AF-S!!
Click to expand...

Not these days, Andy :D! Well, not a "minty" one anyway ;).

At the time, I was having a hard job finding the 18-35mm and as they appeared to have been discontinued, I let myself get dragged into an eBay bidding war on one of the first ones that came along :bang:.

I should also add that I bought it in Germany and paid in Euros, at a time when the Euro was almost equal to the pound :(. At today's rates, it would be under 300 quid, but that's still more than average for a used one with no box. Gonna take a bath on selling this one, I can already tell :crying:.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top