Lens Review: Tamron 28-75 f2.8

[callaesthetics]

I like to carry my camera with me so i can capture the great random moments of my life. I have a lot of prime lens so i generally just chose one when i go out. The thought of a zoom lens would be a great benefit for flexibility. I have a 17-40 f4 lens, but it doesn't have enough reach and f4 isn't very fast. I went in search of a 24-70 ish range. Although i would love the Canon 24-70 f2.8II, $2300 is more than im willing to spend. The Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VR came to mind, it was still kind of spendy at $1300. The Sigma 24-70 f2.8 is nice but the reviews weren't too good especially for a $800 lens.

Then i stumbled upon the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and it reminded me of my lovely Tamron 17-50 f2.8 when i was shooting crop. The 28-75 f2.8 runs about $500 brand new, not bad for a full frame f2.8 zoom lens. I kept an eye out for used ones on the market, i finally found one at National Camera Exchange for $350. After some talking they lowered it down to $325. The lens is in excellent condition (pretty much new).

The lens is amazingly small compare to all the other similar brands. The colors and contrast are nice. It's sharp wide open at f2.8 on the wide end (28mm), it gets a little soft when zoomed all the way to 75mm. It becomes very sharp at f4. There's some vignetting which is normal, and acceptable. The focus motor is buzzy, but it doesn't bother me. Focus is fast. Overall its a very nice lens and for $325 im very happy. Now when i leave with my camera just to shoot random subjects, this lens will fill that 'general purpose' and 'flexibility' use that i couldn't get from my primes. It also saves my back from carrying all those primes. Honestly, i don't think anyone can tell the difference between this lens and a lens that costs $2300. Of course when i have enough cash i'll upgrade, until then this will keep me quite satisfied.

-Cam


Samples:

[callaesthetics]

[kouasupra]

I always hated the noisey AF system on the tamron. Even though they are great affordable lens. They feels cheap and very plasticky. I used to owned a tamron 17-50mm. Amazing lens for the money and it was sharp and the AF system was pretty fast. I had that lens mounted on my XTi everywhere I went.

I end up picking up the Canon 24-70L II just because I loved the "brick" so much. Now with the 24-70L II mounted on my 1DX. Photos are fantastic and I could *never* miss a shot.

Great reviews on the lens for sure. Between you and I and maybe a few folks here I'm sure they can't tell the difference at all in terms of IQ. Unless your pixel peeping. LOL

[callaesthetics]

Great reviews on the lens for sure. Between you and I and maybe a few folks here I'm sure they can't tell the difference at all in terms of IQ. Unless your pixel peeping. LOL

Oh yeah, there's definitely a difference when pixel peeping. Not to mention the bokeh is much better on the 'L' lens. But im over that phase, im actually digging out my old rebel bodies and trying to use them more often now. Like i've heard somewhere before, if people are first noticing how sharp your images are, you're doing it wrong because they're not seeing the overall statement of the photo.