how does this lens compare with tamron 24-70 VC?
895922
This was a gift to my Daughter, who is a photographer, and she has used it an likes it a lot. It was a good price compared to the name brands. She did some research and chose this one so, as she has not used both lenses I cannot say how they compare. Again, she researched and decided on this lens and she is satisfied with the lens.
895923
hi,there are some differences. the tamron has Image stabilization--has 17 Elementsalso tamron has3 LD (Low Dispersion) elements, 2 XR (Extra Refractive Index) elements, 3 glass molded aspheric elements , 1 hybrid aspherical elementspec and quality wise the tamron is better.
1668187
I really like my 16-300 mm Tamron and would recommend it to someone looking to purchase something in that range. That being said, I have never used an 18-270, but, my guess is that you can't get as close or as far with that lens as what I get. But the difference really isn't that much. If it were me and looking to to move up, I'd move up to the Nikon 80 - 400 mm lens. It has what I think is a better glass, and more range. However, you can get a Tamron 150 - 600 mm for about half the price of the mentioned Nikon.
357723
I spent many months comparing 28-300 and this 24-120 before I settle with this. I was looking for a walk around lenses for travel and family picture because I don't want my f2.8 lenses to take all the fun out of the trip as they are heavy and big. To my surprise, this 24-120 replaced my 24-70 f2.8 except for shooting sports as the AF is not as snappy as the 24-70 f2.8 and I need to shoot more frames to cherry pick the ones that are in focus. Other than sports, my copy of 24-120 f4 has taken over the job of 24-70 f2.8. I used it at weddings and senior pictures...... I am very happy with it. I got it in "brand new white box" for about half the price and that's even a greater deal. I spent many months comparing 28-300 and this 24-120 before I settle with this. I was looking for a walk around lenses for travel and family picture because I don't want my f2.8 lenses to take all the fun out of the trip as they are heavy and big. To my surprise, this 24-120 replaced my 24-70 f2.8 except for shooting sports as the AF is not as snappy as the 24-70 f2.8 and I need to shoot more frames to cherry pick the ones that are in focus. Other than sports, my copy of 24-120 f4 has taken over the job of 24-70 f2.8. I used it at weddings and senior pictures...... I am very happy with it.... » Read More I spent many months comparing 28-300 and this 24-120 before I settle with this. I was looking for a walk around lenses for travel and family picture because I don't want my f2.8 lenses to take all the fun out of the trip as they are heavy and big. To my surprise, this 24-120 replaced my 24-70 f2.8 except for shooting sports as the AF is not as snappy as the 24-70 f2.8 and I need to shoot more frames to cherry pick the ones that are in focus. Other than sports, my copy of 24-120 f4 has taken over the job of 24-70 f2.8. I used it at weddings and senior pictures...... I am very happy with it. I got it in "brand new white box" for about half the price and that's even a greater deal. « Show Less
1533866
You have 10mm more with the Tamron. You have twice the size aperture comparing 2.8 to 4. That is a huge huge difference. I tested mine in detail at the center and some spots around the corner AT THE SAME APERTURE with my Nikon 24-120, it is every bit as sharp under high magnification. I did quite a scientific comparison. If you know the outstanding optical quality of the Nikon 24-120, you'll be really impressed.
1100542
Yes it does. But i would recomend a different lens. Tamron 70-300 vc is way superior. I purchased the sigma and was nkt happy with the focus and image quality. Used tamron and canon usm i.s. is the same price as this lens and superior.
92186
Hello, other than 4mm in the zoom and the nano coating on the 24-70, nothing. If u wanna get technical they are completely different parts internally but they perform almost identically. I am very familiar with both lenses and they both have their ups and downs however I am seeing a lot of the 24-70's having soft focus issues particularly wide open. This can be repaired and we do have access to fix this problem it is a hassle. The 28-70 does not have this problem. The 28-70's major flaw is the squeaky AF. But this is a easy fix. Personally I would save the money and get the 28-70.
88040
I have a canon 24-70mm f2.8 (very comparable with your Tamron) and as with all variable ND filters there is a degree of vignetting at the higher points, especially if you tend towards more full daylight shooting. the Tiffen is manageable however and still offers up great image quality.
80622
Yes, I have a T2i with 2 kit lens. I purchased the 50mm f1.8 and it's a wonderful little lens, great for portraits and closeups. I recently (literally a day ago) bought the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 without VC. All I can say is WOW. For less than $500 I finally found a lens that does everything really well. Photos and videos. It's super sharp and super fast. I didn't get the VC version of this lens as I've read mixed reviews about softness. The older lens is beautiful!
1526812
I had the Tamron first. I got it because it had good reviews, a lower price, and IS. Bottom line: it was very soft and had AWFUL back focusing issues over 50 mm. I sent it to Tamron for calibration and it came back worse. I ended up returning it and instead of getting another copy of the Tamron, got the Canon. Best decision I ever made. This is the sharpest lens I own, including all my primes. I was told by Tamron that 20% of their 24-70s have focus issues on the Mark III (which I have) due to the Mark III's focusing system and the Tamron not being totally compatible with it. I have a 60D as well and the Tamron also had back focus issues with that body as well, although slightly less. I would not hesitate to recommend the Canon, bar none.
230522
I have a tamron 70-200mm 2.8 di vc and it fits that lens fine. The Canon 70-300 L looks a little on the fat side. Length wise should be no problem. You might want to check out the dimensions of both.
632567
hi .. had the same choice to make.. but finally went with the sigma.. 50mm shorter but i think the OS capability will eventually make the sigma a more worthwhile purchase.. I live in Singapore.. Price for the tamron is about $750 and the sigma at $840 (singapore dollars). hope this helps
394030
agreed with the sentiments above. I have purchased the tamron 16-300, as well as the nikon 18-300 f6.3 and this lense. The difference with the nikon is noticeable. Not only in picture quality. But also in distance. the 300 on the tamron doesn't reach where the nikon does. granted the nikon 18-300 @300 doesn't match the nikon 55-300 @ 300 either. Also the movement, the tamron is much stiffer than the nikon options. A Great all day lense. Im working into prime lenses, and high quality fixed aperture lenses, but for now I still use this as my main glass.
1779687
I had a d20 several years ago. Tamron has been a lens of choice from back in my film days. They have never let me down. That lens is very versatile and a great choice for your camera.
1609778
Good timing on your question, because DPReview.com JUST posted their review last week on that lens:http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamron_70-200_2p8_c16/Optically it appears to be quite good. AF is slow and noisy, but for 694 bucks at Amazon you can't beat the price if budget is a concern.
475643
no, that is Tamron SP 70-200MM F/2.8 DI VC USD Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon (FX) CamerasIf you have the funds, but the VC version, If not, the optics on this lens is the same w/o the VC... focusing is slower too.
1703578
I purchased a Canon 60D recently and also purchased a Tamron 70-300 MM along with a Canon 18-135 MM lens. The Canon 18-135 lens is terrific! I took photos of the same subject using a Canon 18-135, the Tamron 70-300, and a Sigma 18-200 mm lens on the 60D camera. At full telephoto for all 3 lens, the Canon 18-135 was sharper than the Sigma and equaled the Tamron when I cropped the image down to the same size as the longer 300mm Tamron. I don't know if these results would hold true for all Canon bodies but it sure works for the 18 megapixel 60D. As an aside, the Tamron 70-300 mm with VC optical stability is a great lens too. I purchased a Canon 60D recently and also purchased a Tamron 70-300 MM along with a Canon 18-135 MM lens. The Canon 18-135 lens is terrific! I took photos of the same subject using a Canon 18-135, the Tamron 70-300, and a Sigma 18-200 mm lens on the 60D camera. At full telephoto for all 3 lens, the Canon 18-135 was sharper than the Sigma and equaled the Tamron when I cropped the image down to the same size as the longer 300mm Tamron. I don't know if these results would hold true for all Canon bodies but it sure works for the 18 megapixel 60D. As an aside, the Tamron 70-300 mm with VC... » Read More I purchased a Canon 60D recently and also purchased a Tamron 70-300 MM along with a Canon 18-135 MM lens. The Canon 18-135 lens is terrific! I took photos of the same subject using a Canon 18-135, the Tamron 70-300, and a Sigma 18-200 mm lens on the 60D camera. At full telephoto for all 3 lens, the Canon 18-135 was sharper than the Sigma and equaled the Tamron when I cropped the image down to the same size as the longer 300mm Tamron. I don't know if these results would hold true for all Canon bodies but it sure works for the 18 megapixel 60D. As an aside, the Tamron 70-300 mm with VC optical stability is a great lens too. « Show Less
134989
I am very happy with this lens. I have not tried the Sigma. I have the tamron 28-75 and the 70-200 VC both outstanding lenses - fast and sharp. Tamron is slightly more expensive and reviews always slightly higher. Sorry I could not give you more info about the Sigma