A&P New Lens *pics* Tamron 28-75 f2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (if) Macro

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by isaac86hatch, Apr 13, 2008.

  1. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    Lately I have been finding myself in situations that are slightly out of range for my 17-50 and a bit too close for my 70-200 so I have been looking for something I can throw on my camera and pack light. Since I am mainly a reporter, the thought of being able to carry just my note pad, my little Sony recorder and one camera with one lens plus a flash is very appealing. I used to carry around a whole bag full of all kinds of lenses, bodies, PWs, flashes and just about everything else I thought I might need, but that was just slowing me down or fuckin' up the program when I was in a jam-packed room. So in the past few months I have been able to gauge just about any situation and pack accordingly.

    Looking for a medium range zoom was a fairly easy task. I knew I did not need L Glass and I certainly knew I did not want to pay 1000+ for a lens that I would not really get heavy use. I've had the Tamron 17-50 for over a year now and it's been a flawless performer so I looked to Tamron again. I played around with the 28-75 before and thought it would make a good walk arounder for news-type stuff.

    Thus far, I am pretty impressed for what I paid ($360 @ local shop). My only complaint so far is the focus is pretty slow - enter price difference with L glass. It's sharp enough for me from f2.8 on seems and fairly accurate but with only a few hours working with it, it's hard to say. Build quality is not bad and reflects all of the other Tammys I have shot with. Of course the zoom is opposite of Canon lenses, but I never notice the difference.

    I am headed up to Portland for a photo meet up and model shoot when I will really put it to the test. More to come.

    This is obviously not a very scientific test, but it works for me.
    Anywho, here's the stats:
    Canon 30D
    ISO 500 (Usually shoot here when in the field)
    Lenses:
    17-50 f2.8
    28-75 f2.8
    Canon 50 f1.8 II (Would have liked to use my f1.4 but it is on loan to someone.)
    Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS

    17-50 50mm @ f2.8
    [​IMG]

    28-75 50mm @ f2.8
    [​IMG]

    50mm (f1.8II) @ f2.8
    [​IMG]

    70-200 f2.8L IS 70mm @ f2.8
    [​IMG]

    17-50 50mm @ f5.6
    [​IMG]

    28-75 50mm @ f5.6
    [​IMG]

    50mm (f1.8II) @ f5.6
    [​IMG]

    70-200 f2.8L IS 70mm @ f5.6
    [​IMG]

    17-50 50mm @ f8
    [​IMG]

    28-75 50mm @f8
    [​IMG]

    50mm (f1.8II) @ f8
    [​IMG]

    70-200 f2.8L IS 70mm @ f8
    [​IMG]

    Around the house @ f2.8
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]


    75mm @ f5.6
    [​IMG]

    24mm @ f5.6
    [​IMG]
     
  2. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    btw, sharpness is set to 0 on all of the photos. Basically straight from the camera. Last photo is +9 vibrance in ACR
     
  3. Bloke

    Bloke Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2003
    Messages:
    26,775
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Pekin, IL
    manual white balance please
     
  4. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    All shot RAW/Manual, no settings were adjusted except turning the sharpness to zero. Was not going the Pulitzer with this.
     
  5. OneTwo

    OneTwo me>you OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    30,113
    Likes Received:
    91
    the tamron is equal to, and sometimes beat the 24-70L in just about every IQ test.

    Just gotta decided if the superior build quality and faster/better AF is worth 3x the price.
     

Share This Page