Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 Xr Di

[StuDizzle]

I no longer have this lens, but here is a shot I took with it from Zion National Park in Utah:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3655/3591819459_fd642872ea_b.jpg

[enrigonz]

[QUOTE=StuDizzle;9440461]I no longer have this lens, but here is a shot I took with it from Zion National Park in Utah:

what made you get rid of it and is the current lens that replaced it any better?

[StuDizzle]

what made you get rid of it and is the current lens that replaced it any better?

I already had a EF-S 17-85mm before I got the Tamron, so I ended up keeping the 17-85mm in my line-up. The f/2.8 on the Tamron was nice to have but I was finding myself to not be in many situations where I would need it. I shoot alot of landscapes so I'm almost always shooting at f/9-f/13. Hope this answers your question :)

[enrigonz]

Well, I finally got this awesome lens in my hands and I got to say is the best lens I've ever owned. It makes what would have been mediocre shots good shot and good shot look like they were done using much more expensive lenses. I'm very happy so far, I do notice a little noise in some of the very low light shots but it takes shots that none of my other lenses would have been able to capture and most of them very sharp. I'll post some pictures later but for any of you thinking to buy this lens, go for it, you'll be happy.

[pridash]

Well, I finally got this awesome lens in my hands and I got to say is the best lens I've ever owned. It makes what would have been mediocre shots good shot and good shot look like they were done using much more expensive lenses. I'm very happy so far, I do notice a little noise in some of the very low light shots but it takes shots that none of my other lenses would have been able to capture and most of them very sharp. I'll post some pictures later but for any of you thinking to buy this lens, go for it, you'll be happy.

Congrats on the lens - it truly is a great one! But note that the noise is due to the camera sensor, not the lens.

[enrigonz]

Congrats on the lens - it truly is a great one! But note that the noise is due to the camera sensor, not the lens.

Good to know, what camera body/sensor would benefit from this lens?

[Bobster]

Good to know, what camera body/sensor would benefit from this lens?
i shoot on FF and love it, i know ppl who have it on a 5D2 and love it..

[mikejet]

Just borrowed this from my friend. I'll take some shots when I get home!

[enrigonz]

Just borrowed this from my friend. I'll take some shots when I get home!

post results

[PrimePhotographer]

Love mine!

[mayt444]

Just did some trading with a guy that had one on craigslist locally. So far it looks real promising. I think I'm gonna like it on the 50D. It's sharper and has much better contrast than the 18-55 IS I have. This thread was a big help in making the decission. I will try to post some pics tomorow.
Clay

[enrigonz]

Here are some pictures of my 8 month old son I took the first day I got this lens last week.

[mikejet]

post results

Here's two of my dog.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4005/4310873096_3bac05265b_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2565/4310877462_079fa590b0_b.jpg

Both were shot wide open at ISO 100 with my 580EX II bounced.

[mayt444]

Here's two of my dog.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4005/4310873096_3bac05265b_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2565/4310877462_079fa590b0_b.jpg

Both were shot wide open at ISO 100 with my 580EX II bounced.

Neat looking pooch Mike! Very sharp lens. Here are a couple of test shots from this lens that I picked up yeaterday in a trade.

http://i635.photobucket.com/albums/uu77/mayt444/landscape/backyardcopyweb.jpg

http://i635.photobucket.com/albums/uu77/mayt444/samsnow4copyweb.jpg

http://i635.photobucket.com/albums/uu77/mayt444/samsnow1copyweb.jpg

[MasterFX]

I tried my 2x teleconverter on this Tamron 28-75 2.8 lens and took some photos.
Wow it was amazingly detailed for macro photos! I'm very impressed with this lens in every way.
This looks really good. Which TK are you using? (Kenko MC7 or 300 Pro...)

[misty66]

One from today...again snow...:mad:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5209/5270989724_f646da7d76_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/56977249@N08/5270989724/)
Sonbeek in the snow (http://www.flickr.com/photos/56977249@N08/5270989724/) by Photography by Jalomist (http://www.flickr.com/people/56977249@N08/), on Flickr

[HoosierJoe]

Can I join the club again? I bought another copy of this lens on FM. Waiting delivery. This is my THIRD time around with this lens. Yeah, that's right, call me something.

Acutally this last time I sold it was to fund my 50D. I always planned to get another copy. My fav lens, I look forward to using it again.

[jdlloyd67]

Here are some pictures of my 8 month old son I took the first day I got this lens last week.
Holy crap that's a cute kid!!! :D

[enrigonz]

Holy crap that's a cute kid!!! :D

Thank you! :D

[mikejet]

I don't know if it's just me but the two times I've used this lens in low light I've found that I've been missing the focus. When the lighting is good I don't have any issues but when it's dim I've noticed it to be off.

Anyone else have this issue?

[richierich1212]

Sample pix?

[reprazent]

The AF won't work as well in dim conditions, you will experience this with any AF lens.

[snowshark13]

A few recent shots

http://www.digitalsnowshark.com/PostPics/adatamron.jpg

http://www.digitalsnowshark.com/PostPics/sylviatamron.jpg

http://www.digitalsnowshark.com/PostPics/samtamron.jpg

[enrigonz]

I don't know if it's just me but the two times I've used this lens in low light I've found that I've been missing the focus. When the lighting is good I don't have any issues but when it's dim I've noticed it to be off.

Anyone else have this issue?

very typical of any lens specially on a crop sensor camera

[benee]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2792/4335428635_306f746129_o.jpg

[MMURAD]

I am still waiting for my Tamron 90macro to show up, so I am doing waterdrops with the 28-75...seems to work pretty good.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4009/4335600541_ab6db68c85_b.jpg

[usingthejohn]

^^^
awesome shot! how did you set that up?

[MMURAD]

^^^
awesome shot! how did you set that up?

thanks, I use a very high tech, sophisticated set up, that cost $0 and 5 minutes to put together.
a cardboard box with a hole in it and a dropper. ;)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4070/4336352229_08a304c981.jpg

[imbillkamal]

How do you guys think this fairs out in ceremony/wedding situations? Also as an all around walk around lense?

[pridash]

I don't know if it's just me but the two times I've used this lens in low light I've found that I've been missing the focus. When the lighting is good I don't have any issues but when it's dim I've noticed it to be off.

Anyone else have this issue?

The AF won't work as well in dim conditions, you will experience this with any AF lens.

As Reprazent said. Especially if the contrast is low it will hunt. However, I did some low light tests here (http://plawrencephotography.wordpress.com/2009/05/08/tamron-28-75-low-light-tests/) (sorry haven't updated my blog for some time now! :) ) and had no problems focussing in low light.

I am still waiting for my Tamron 90macro to show up, so I am doing waterdrops with the 28-75...seems to work pretty good.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4009/4335600541_ab6db68c85_b.jpg

I thought this was shot with a dedicated macro - very, very impressive! Never bothered to use the Tammy for macro, instead opting for the Canon 100, but this just shows that its very capable in this area too! Thx for the set up shot - must try this at some point.

[ProD1gy_KiD]

what would be a better choice? The tamron 17-50mm f2.8 or this? i know the focal length is better but IQ and AF wise. which is better? sharpness,softness etc. Im deciding between these two so i need all the research and help i can get. thanks :)

[HoosierJoe]

what would be a better choice? The tamron 17-50mm f2.8 or this? i know the focal length is better but IQ and AF wise. which is better? sharpness,softness etc. Im deciding between these two so i need all the research and help i can get. thanks :)
I have both. I can't tell the difference in performance. I really like the "macro" of the 28-75 and find its focal length good for what I do the most. It's great for portrait work.

But I also like the 17-50 for all around and indoor use. I never could choose between them so I got both. For a while I had the tamron 17-35 paired with the 28-75. It was a great lens too.

It really comes down to which focal length is best for what you do. If your 18-55 doesn't suit what you do that well then the 17-50 won't either.

[enrigonz]

what would be a better choice? The tamron 17-50mm f2.8 or this? i know the focal length is better but IQ and AF wise. which is better? sharpness,softness etc. Im deciding between these two so i need all the research and help i can get. thanks :)

I have the 28-75 and use it mainly for portraits but is also my walk-around lens, haven't removed it from my camera since I got it 3 weeks ago. I find the focal length to be perfect for portraits although sometimes I wish it was longer but it satisfies my needs so I'm very happy with it, not sure if there's any such thing as perfect out there but very close to it for the price, incredible IQ, sharpness, colors, etc.

[MMURAD]

what would be a better choice? The tamron 17-50mm f2.8 or this? i know the focal length is better but IQ and AF wise. which is better? sharpness,softness etc. Im deciding between these two so i need all the research and help i can get. thanks :)

You have the 18-55 kit lens, do you like that focal length or to you find yourself wishing it had more reach? How often do you shoot with it at 18mm? I used the kit lens a lot at first and then went through all my photos and looked at the average focal length I tended to shoot at.
for me I was shooting at 45 to 55 with the kit lens and wished I had more frequently...so I got the 28-75.
I will probably get the 17-50 later for indoor group shots, but it is not a priority for me.
you also have a wide angle sigma, so it seems logical to me that the 28-75 would be a good choice.

Heck I find that with the 28-75 I often wish I had more reach which is why I am looking for a 70-200 2.8.

as a side note, since I got the 28-75, the kit lens has not been on my camera.

[ProD1gy_KiD]

i am mainly going to need this lens for urban photography and portrait. i was thinking selling my kit lens and the 55-250 and get either the 17-50 or the 28-75 and after save a little bit more and get a 70-200 f/4L IS. Group shot at around 28mm arent so bad neither so maybe i'll just go to the 28-75 way. sharpness wise which is better?

[enrigonz]

i am mainly going to need this lens for urban photography and portrait. i was thinking selling my kit lens and the 55-250 and get either the 17-50 or the 28-75 and after save a little bit more and get a 70-200 f/4L IS. Group shot at around 28mm arent so bad neither so maybe i'll just go to the 28-75 way. sharpness wise which is better?

I've taken many group shots at 28mm and everybody looks good, I've been able to get everyone in frame in tight spaces, so for me 28mm is more than enough.

[ProD1gy_KiD]

im leaning towards this. i just sold my kit lens and now i thought about how i didnt even use it that much and changed my mind into buying this tamron 28-75 rather than the 17-50. i think both lenses are great but i thought i already had a sigma 10-20 as my wide side back up and needed a mid-range zoom lens. and this will defenitely go with a 70-200 in the near future. im gonna try and find a used one or maybe get a new one.

[richierich1212]

Yeah if you get the 28-75 and 70-200 later you basically have all lengths covered.

[ProD1gy_KiD]

Yeah if you get the 28-75 and 70-200 later you basically have all lengths covered.

thats what i was thinking. i got my sigma for my UWA needs, this tamron 28-75 as my mid-range, and the 70-200 later on as my telephoto. and thinking of getting a couple primes too. btw how does this perform in low light situations?

[HoosierJoe]

thats what i was thinking. i got my sigma for my UWA needs, this tamron 28-75 as my mid-range, and the 70-200 later on as my telephoto. and thinking of getting a couple primes too. btw how does this perform in low light situations?
I almost bought a new 28-75 a while back from Amazon for $422 shipped. But then I found a barely used one on FM forum for $315 shipped. Spent the rest of the money on a really great Case Logic bag. Bargains are out there if you are patient.

[enrigonz]

thats what i was thinking. i got my sigma for my UWA needs, this tamron 28-75 as my mid-range, and the 70-200 later on as my telephoto. and thinking of getting a couple primes too. btw how does this perform in low light situations?

You will read it doesn't perform stellar in low light but the final result outweighs this flaw. I think it performs just as good as any other lens does in this price category. It has not left my camera since I bought it. I keep saying this but it's the truth and I never thought this will be the case.

[usingthejohn]

thanks, I use a very high tech, sophisticated set up, that cost $0 and 5 minutes to put together.
a cardboard box with a hole in it and a dropper. ;)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4070/4336352229_08a304c981.jpg

Man...you spared no expense !!!!

Hahaha...going to give it a go-around later. So you only used available light, and no off-camera?

[usingthejohn]

a few more shots w/ my 28-75:

1. http://usingthejohn.smugmug.com/Other/artsy-fartsy/cinnabon/779709009_ZG8Hg-M.jpg
2. http://usingthejohn.smugmug.com/Other/artsy-fartsy/plumes/779711008_3qnLL-M.jpg
3. http://usingthejohn.smugmug.com/People/My-family/car-wash-4/760823735_tM6B2-M.jpg

[MMURAD]

Man...you spared no expense !!!!

Hahaha...going to give it a go-around later. So you only used available light, and no off-camera?

I used a flash on camera bounced up into the box.

[Tokyudo]

Nothing special here, just a quick shot of my cat. I do love this lens though.

http://i49.tinypic.com/5cygec.jpg

[SplashBoxKP]

Hi, Does anyone know if Tamron are planning to put VC on the 28-75mm Lense as Sigma have just put OS on the 17-70, but dont fancy going away from Tamron as I have read great reviews about the tamron lense.... Thanks

[enrigonz]

Hi, Does anyone know if Tamron are planning to put VC on the 28-75mm Lense as Sigma have just put OS on the 17-70, but dont fancy going away from Tamron as I have read great reviews about the tamron lense.... Thanks

Do you use a 28-75 now? I don't see much need for VC in this lens and for whatever the reason the 17-50 version of this lens is better without VC as confirmed by others.

[ryaaannnn]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4040/4341137975_1a277510ff_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/z0mgitsryan/4341137975/)

[sznajder]

Botanic Garden- Chicago. Go for it - great lens...

[sznajder]

One more...

[mikejet]

The AF won't work as well in dim conditions, you will experience this with any AF lens.

It was weird though because I think the AF assist from my 580EX wasn't working properly with the Tamron for some reason.

[enrigonz]

Botanic Garden- Chicago. Go for it - great lens...

WOW! Awesome pictures! What camera did you shoot this with?

[sznajder]

WOW! Awesome pictures! What camera did you shoot this with?
Thanks. It was with Pentax K20D. Strait from the cam no PP.

[enrigonz]

Thanks. It was with Pentax K20D. Strait from the cam no PP.

Job well done! Kudos!

[ryaaannnn]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2745/4344118787_50b7e2ee9d_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/z0mgitsryan/4344118787/)

[theague]

I hope that's not your paycheck ;)

[ryaaannnn]

I hope that's not your paycheck ;)

LOL!

no it wasn't, it was for my weekly expense from work.

[nickbunyun]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2677/4341692662_91821ded0a_o.jpg

[polobreaka]

i am proud to say i am the new owner of this lens!

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4014/4339326285_1696d4af9a_b.jpg

[Bobster]

forgot about this one..
http://www.pbase.com/bob_hall/image/113670741.jpg

[Bobster]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2677/4341692662_91821ded0a_o.jpg
^would be instantly improved by removing the green selective colour

[theague]

^would be instantly improved by removing the green selective colour

+1, I'm not a fan of selective color in most instances and I don't think it works well in this instance either.

[ckfishel2001]

Just got the lens and really love it!

[enrigonz]

Just got the lens and really love it!

Nice shots!

[ryaaannnn]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4003/4347382954_9b5f5d3ce0_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/z0mgitsryan/4347382954/)

[ckfishel2001]

Nice shots!


Thanks. I wish I was in sunny FL right now. Far too much of that white stuff the past few days (thankful I'm not in DC or Maryland!)

[ryaaannnn]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2696/4355432010_8b2fa515c2_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/z0mgitsryan/4355432010/)

[ryaaannnn]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4018/4358085974_3fc6bd19cb_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/z0mgitsryan/4358085974/)

[Bobster]

so you're dating Zapp Brannigan?

[drummerhc]

Though the focal length is odd on a crop, this lens is perfect for portrait work.

(Stupid reflections from the glasses:mad:)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4021/4361371099_b64f0a413b_b.jpg

[ckfishel2001]

Though the focal length is odd on a crop, this lens is perfect for portrait work.

(Stupid reflections from the glasses:mad:)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4021/4361371099_b64f0a413b_b.jpg

Nice shot. I actually found l love this focal length on a crop. Never shot full frame, so crop is all I know, but I had a 17-55is and found myself at 55 way more than 17-54 so I sold that and my 28-135 and got this. Love it. Love the quality of shot it can produce, and love the focal length....and
if/when I have a full frame, it will work on that body unlike the 17-55.

[jdlloyd67]

Just got the lens and really love it!
How do you like it compared to your 135mm f/2?

[ckfishel2001]

How do you like it compared to your 135mm f/2?

I love the 135, but will have this lens on the camera more. This will be my indoor, catch the kids doing what they are doing lens. I will probably even start with this lens if I take the camera to the park or something. The 135 gets used for soccer (lots of trees blocking the sun) in the fall, and when I want the background to be blown out.

I've been blowing through gear in the year that I've been trying to get into photography. Think I'm settled now. 7d, this lens, 70-200 4is, 135L, 50 1.4, 100 tokina macro, 11-16 tokina, 150-500 OS. Covers just about everything, just need to start getting better with light.....and getting some more light.

To get back to the original question though....135 is killer, but you need to do lots more foot zooming and need some room. This lens is WAY sharper than I excpected, and is a nice focal length for the way I seem to like to shoot. 135 is for 'doing photography'.....or like I mentioned earlier...for small field soccer. This is an 'everything' lens.

[SoundsGood]

I've been blowing through gear in the year that I've been trying to get into photography. Think I'm settled now. 7d, this lens, 70-200 4is, 135L, 50 1.4, 100 tokina macro, 11-16 tokina, 150-500 OS. Covers just about everything, just need to start getting better with light.....and getting some more light.
What are your thoughts on the Tamron 28-75 vs the Canon 17-55?

[enrigonz]

I find this lens to be the best I've tried and will keep using it for most of my shots specially portraits. The one negative thing I noticed about it, is how in hunts for focus specially at 75mm in low light. Does everyone else experience the same thing or is it just my camera having a hard time? Most of the time it does good but about 10-15% of the time I can miss a good shot because of this.

[ckfishel2001]

What are your thoughts on the Tamron 28-75 vs the Canon 17-55?

I loved the 17-55. I loved the IS on that lens. Thought it was sharp wide open....and very sharp stopped down slightly. It's a dust pump like everyone says, but NEVER saw that affect pictures. For ME, I like this focal length more. It's just wide enough I can get a group in ok. I spend most of my time at or near 75mm. I think this lens is just as sharp as the 17-55 though.

If you have a crop, and want some level of wide angle, the 17-55 is the lens to get...77mm filters aren't the cheapest, but they are pretty common if you're going to use it for landscape stuff (NDs, CPs). I decided my Tokina was what I would pull out if I wanted wide (killer lens!!) and this would be more 'everything' lens.

[ckfishel2001]

I find this lens to be the best I've tried and will keep using it for most of my shots specially portraits. The one negative thing I noticed about it, is how in hunts for focus specially at 75mm in low light. Does everyone else experience the same thing or is it just my camera having a hard time? Most of the time it does good but about 10-15% of the time I can miss a good shot because of this.

concur, does hunt in low light....not bad enough for me to worry about though

[SoundsGood]

...I had a 17-55is and found myself at 55 way more than 17-54 so I sold that and my 28-135 and got this. Love it. Love the quality of shot it can produce, and love the focal length....and
if/when I have a full frame, it will work on that body unlike the 17-55.
Ahh, just noticed this, so disregard my post/question above.

I happen to agree with what you said. I'm also almost always at 55mm with my 17-55 and almost never at 17-28mm. So I too have thought about selling the 17-55.

I do prefer that the 17-55 is "smoother" than the 28-75 though.

[SoundsGood]

I loved the 17-55. I loved the IS on that lens. Thought it was sharp wide open....and very sharp stopped down slightly. It's a dust pump like everyone says, but NEVER saw that affect pictures. For ME, I like this focal length more. It's just wide enough I can get a group in ok. I spend most of my time at or near 75mm. I think this lens is just as sharp as the 17-55 though.

If you have a crop, and want some level of wide angle, the 17-55 is the lens to get...
Looks like I keep "just missing" your posts. :)

Again, I agree with everything you've said. I've been told that I'm crazy to think that 28mm is wide enough on a crop. But guess what? For me, it is. It's very, VERY seldom that I need wider.

And yes, the 28-75 is very sharp, even at f/2.8. And even though everyone says Canon color rules, I find the pics from the 17-55 to be slightly "cool" (with a blue-ish tint) while the Tamron color looks great to my eyes.

[Livinthalife]

I went to 24-70L from Tamron. The colors of the L were much better in my opinion, but the Tamron appeared more sharp. The focus speed is super on the L and not so much on the Tamron. Tamron build was decent.

For the price difference, Tamron is the way to go. I miss mine ;)

[jdlloyd67]

I do love my Tammy lens but wonder if it'd be an improvement to move up to the 24-105 f/4L?

[ckfishel2001]

I do love my Tammy lens but wonder if it'd be an improvement to move up to the 24-105 f/4L?

IS, more length, maybe a bit better build, red ring:), maybe focuses faster/quieter

drawbacks f4, more expensive

[SoundsGood]

drawbacks f4, more expensive
And... not as sharp, bokeh not as good.

[ckfishel2001]

And... not as sharp, bokeh not as good.

exactly

[jdlloyd67]

exactly
You guys don't think the 24-105 is as sharp as the Tamron? Really?

[ckfishel2001]

You guys don't think the 24-105 is as sharp as the Tamron? Really?

I can't compare, as I've never shot the 24-105. Bokeh though ....although going out to 104 and staying at f4 should do a nice job at that as well.

[jdlloyd67]

Just as soon as I win the lottery this will no longer be a question. I'll have every "L" lens in my bag. I bet even after that I'll still keep my Tammy. ;)

[polobreaka]

do anyone have a copy of a slight front focusing? i used mine throughout the whole wedding, was taking some ring pictures at 2.8 and noticed the table cloth right in front of the ring is in focus while the ring was oof :(

[Dee1979]

Wow.. I went through all 96 pages today LOL! Thank you for posting!

I'm getting this lens in today and should have it in my hands this evening when I get home from work. Really excited to start playing with it!

OH and to the person who posted that last water drop picture with the setup.. Genius! Love it when they give away the secrets.

[enrigonz]

Wow.. I went through all 96 pages today LOL! Thank you for posting!

I'm getting this lens in today and should have it in my hands this evening when I get home from work. Really excited to start playing with it!

OH and to the person who posted that last water drop picture with the setup.. Genius! Love it when they give away the secrets.

Congrats! I think you're going to love the crap out of it! Post some pictures!

[ontopofm]

this len is as sharp as its brother 17-50mm

[Bobster]

this len is as sharp as its brother 17-50mm
i find both the 17-50 and 28-75 to be of equal quality, i'm happy to use either :)

[HoosierJoe]

i find both the 17-50 and 28-75 to be of equal quality, i'm happy to use either :)
Me too.

[polobreaka]

ever since i picked up this lens, my 50mm 1.8 has been sitting around. is this normal? haha

[richierich1212]

ever since i picked up this lens, my 50mm 1.8 has been sitting around. is this normal? haha

It's normal for the nifty-fifty to be neglected after a more expensive lens has been acquired.

[enrigonz]

ever since i picked up this lens, my 50mm 1.8 has been sitting around. is this normal? haha

I sold mine, didn't want it collecting dust.

[polobreaka]

I sold mine, didn't want it collecting dust.


thats why mine is up on the B&S forum as of this morning :p

[richierich1212]

Yeah mine is collecting dust until my sister gets a camera, then it'll be hers.

[bad karma]

http://modelmayhm-0.vo.llnwd.net/d1/photos/100214/19/4b78bf2813dc9.jpg

Please note, I am also a professional retoucher so this is not straight out of the camera.

The color reproduction and texture quality is straight out of the camera for the most part.

I am using this with my 5D, I use it for beauty shots at the 75mm end.

[Dee1979]

I'm still trying to get use to this lens and have only played with it just a bit. I took a few nicer portrait shots of my niece and sister but they didn't want them online. :P

Right now I have it locked on 28mm. If I don't, it dislikes AV and shows up black? I even played with the ISO but the same thing happens. I'm looking for some help here. Otherwise, it's very clean and sharp. I had to do some editing for my sister.. She disliked her lines so I made her softer with blur. Oh and I am SO not the queen of editing. I need to head over to the edit section for tips because it is not my best ability.

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f301/dee1979/20434_321829682063_538522063_414309.jpg

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f301/dee1979/20434_321829692063_538522063_414309.jpg

[Scott111184]

http://scott-halford.smugmug.com/Portraits/Danielle/IMG7658/792749526_rGzhf-L.jpg


http://scott-halford.smugmug.com/Portraits/Danielle/IMG7739/792760519_Txyte-L.jpg

[richierich1212]

Nice badkarma!

scott, nice shots, the guy in the 2nd pic looks like he's about to crack up and smile though, lol

[cattalk124]

Can someone post some pics at 2.8 and f4? I just got a my copy. Focus good, no front or back focusing but doesn't seem to be a sharp copy. I'll get some pics up eventually to show you all.

[Scott111184]

scott, nice shots, the guy in the 2nd pic looks like he's about to crack up and smile though, lol

They were trying not to laugh, first shoot like this for all of us. :lol:

[moldman]

Can someone post some pics at 2.8 and f4? I just got a my copy. Focus good, no front or back focusing but doesn't seem to be a sharp copy. I'll get some pics up eventually to show you all.

I am looking at this lens also for my XSI. What body are you using?

[cattalk124]

I am looking at this lens also for my XSI. What body are you using?

I have an xsi. And I don't think anything is wrong with my copy anymore. I looked at some samples and reviews that mentioned it being somewhat soft at 2.8. I did more pics at f4 today and they were fine.

[moldman]

So can you tel me how is the lens in low light say indoor gyms (basketball) or house parties with low light? it doesn't seem that f4.0 would work.
I have an xsi. And I don't think anything is wrong with my copy anymore. I looked at some samples and reviews that mentioned it being somewhat soft at 2.8. I did more pics at f4 today and they were fine.

[enrigonz]

I have an xsi. And I don't think anything is wrong with my copy anymore. I looked at some samples and reviews that mentioned it being somewhat soft at 2.8. I did more pics at f4 today and they were fine.

Take your time next time before posting a negative result from any hardware test, most of the time the bad results are due to operator error more than hardware failure. It happens more often than it should.

[enrigonz]

So can you tel me how is the lens in low light say indoor gyms (basketball) or house parties with low light? it doesn't seem that f4.0 would work.

It does great, but could be better, the lens is a great portrait lens, the problem with it sometimes is slow to focus that's all but once you have it on your camera and see the IQ you can get out of it you'll have a hard time putting anything else on it.

[cattalk124]

Take your time next time before posting a negative result from any hardware test, most of the time the bad results are due to operator error more than hardware failure. It happens more often than it should.

Actually I tested it further and I will have to send it in to warranty. Hopefully warranty will get it fixed.

[cattalk124]

So can you tel me how is the lens in low light say indoor gyms (basketball) or house parties with low light? it doesn't seem that f4.0 would work.

The lens focused very fast and correct for me in low light today. If you get a sharp copy the lens should be fine for house parties.

[cattalk124]

Will post new samples soon.

[Bobster]

the shutter isn't f2.8 the aperture is..

your shutter speed was 1/200

[HoosierJoe]

Actually I tested it further and I will have to send it in to warranty. Hopefully warranty will get it fixed.
A good idea. I have owned three copies of this lens. All have been sharp at 2.8. I see people say all the time that it isn't sharp and focuses slowly in low light. I have never had those issues. Maybe I just have been fortunate enough to get really good copies.

[cattalk124]

the shutter isn't f2.8 the aperture is..

your shutter speed was 1/200

Yes I know. I was going to write the shutter speed for the samples but forgot to erase the word "shutter". And yes the aperture I am taking pic at is f2.8.

[MMURAD]

f/2.8 1/200
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2763/4355859645_8089e24d77_b.jpg

f/4 1/200
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4051/4333260925_754664eb54_o.jpg

I think it is pretty sharp and color and contrast are very nice imo.

[cattalk124]

Mmurad your copy is sharp!

[MMURAD]

Mmurad your copy is sharp!

ya I am really happy with it. This is my second copy, the first was not quite right.

[ckfishel2001]

ya I am really happy with it. This is my second copy, the first was not quite right.

is this what you did you yellow bokeh shot with?

[MMURAD]

is this what you did you yellow bokeh shot with?

no that was the Tamron 90 macro. That lens is amazing as well.

[ckfishel2001]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4057/4397108280_fb9de1622c_b.jpg

[ckfishel2001]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2736/4397084934_726990f750_b.jpg

[Pinoyphotos]

First shots out of the box!

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2730/4307174605_13dafc8c83_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2690/4342478428_9e5dd0af0c_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4052/4366134885_e63b0f825a_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4343086145_4a45694499_b.jpg

all on my flickr :p

[ckfishel2001]

First shots out of the box!









all on my flickr :p

enjoy....love the colors in that flag photo

[Dee1979]

They're not as awesome as some others but I like them! :p


http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f301/dee1979/Photography%20Blog/IMG_4560_1.jpg

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f301/dee1979/Photography%20Blog/IMG_4574_1.jpg

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f301/dee1979/Photography%20Blog/IMG_4594_1.jpg

[ckfishel2001]

They're not as awesome as some others but I like them! :p



Very good. Sick of seeing snow, but that's in real life...the photos are great:)

[Keduf]

After seeing the pics in this thread, I was convinced this was the lens for me...My new lens has just arrived and I can't wait to go out shooting with it! Will post some pics once I get some play time :D

[ckfishel2001]

After seeing the pics in this thread, I was convinced this was the lens for me...My new lens has just arrived and I can't wait to go out shooting with it! Will post some pics once I get some play time :D

I'm sure you'll love it!! Have fun, enjoy!

[stevenhasanuddin]

Hi. I just got this lens this morning. Going to try this lens out a bit. :D

[HoosierJoe]

Not the greatest pictures I have ever taken but I can't resist.

It's springtime!

http://i902.photobucket.com/albums/ac230/HoosierJoe/Scenery%20and%20other%20things/IMG_1893.jpg


http://i902.photobucket.com/albums/ac230/HoosierJoe/Scenery%20and%20other%20things/IMG_1892.jpg

[ckfishel2001]

THANK YOU Hoosier Joe!!

[Helena]

Dee1979, great series!

For some time I have thought about getting a travel lens for my 5D (when I don't want to carry my beloved primes) and after have found this thread I decided to try the Tamron. I received it yesterday and it gives wonderful colors, nice rendering and good contrast. At the wider angles it's very sharp even at f/2.8, but unfortunately, it misfocuses badly at the longer focal lengths. At 75mm it's unusable. :( I have owned 14 lenses (all Canon until now) and this is my first bad one. I bought it new, so I'll return it and try a new one asap, because it's obvious that it can be an awesome lens when you get a good copy.

[catalanus]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2799/4406145658_5b71ee4f79_b.jpg

[ckfishel2001]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4002/4406444087_288bd036d3_b.jpg

[AHWagner]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2700/4407223963_76e528a998_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ahwagner_phography_and__designs/4407223963/)

[stevenhasanuddin]

Is it just me, or my lens, but it's not focusing well enough in the longer focal length such as 75 at 2.8.

When I'm using it at 28 @ f/2.8, its sharp. :)

[yogestee]

Is it just me, or my lens, but it's not focusing well enough in the longer focal length such as 75 at 2.8.

When I'm using it at 28 @ f/2.8, its sharp. :)

Steven,,, could be a depth of field issue..

[stevenhasanuddin]

Steven,,, could be a depth of field issue..

Oh yeah, that could be the issue, but at 28 @ 2,8, it's very sharp indeed. :D

[MichaelBernard]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4007/4427148584_40bb0daffb.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4029/4426386131_f110d64d7b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2696/4426384601_17b671949c.jpg

[Dee1979]

Here are a few more from this past weekend..

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f301/dee1979/Photography%20Blog/Alexis3.jpg

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f301/dee1979/Photography%20Blog/Alexis.jpg

[sr20alex]

I will be getting this lens soon! I can't wait!

[MMURAD]

really like this lens.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4072/4434807708_c8ed768fcc_b.jpg

[DC5 Poe]

OP, I love this shot. I wished you stopped it down 1 or 2. Sharp ears would've been even nicer.

Here I go. On a 5Dii body

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4009/4430159972_77d7e82b76.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4041/4430161108_1901e6d5ee.jpg

[ckfishel2001]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4400868933_3425443bc8_b.jpg

[FMX]

This lens takes some real good pics. I was curious as to how it stacks up compared to the Canon version? I've read one review that said it was just as good as the Canon (they compared both on a tripod). I'm looking for a good, lightweight, walk around lens as I don't think either my 70-200mm or my nifty fifty cuts it for just getting out and taking pics. It would, but I'd like to have the smaller range covered as well with the zoom.

Can anyone comment?

Also I was wondering if someone would post a pic of the lens on their camera with the hood on?

[HoosierJoe]

This lens takes some real good pics. I was curious as to how it stacks up compared to the Canon version? I've read one review that said it was just as good as the Canon (they compared both on a tripod). I'm looking for a good, lightweight, walk around lens as I don't think either my 70-200mm or my nifty fifty cuts it for just getting out and taking pics. It would, but I'd like to have the smaller range covered as well with the zoom.

Can anyone comment?

Also I was wondering if someone would post a pic of the lens on their camera with the hood on?
Yeah, that's a subject that has been on several threads. You could do a search on that one.

I read several online tests of the two lenses compared and I came to the conclusion that the Canon is incrementally better at some points that the Tamron. I weighed whether the $600 (for used) price difference was worth the incremental difference and decided that for me it was not.

Also, my wife finds this to be a heavy lens. I don't particularly but I'm 5'10" and 200lbs.

[Rich_]

I had issues with my Canon 50mm f1.2 prime lens so I bough the Tamron 28-75 as a replacement. So far I've been very pleased with the shots I'm getting from this lens.

Odie Coyote howling at the morning sun
http://rgibbens.smugmug.com/Photography/Big-Bend-Nov-2009/IMG5599edited-1/725601379_ySBw2-M.jpg

Big Bend cactus
http://rgibbens.smugmug.com/Photography/Big-Bend-Nov-2009/IMG5536edited-1/725606584_eD3Kx-M.jpg

Baptism
http://rgibbens.smugmug.com/Events/Mike-Jr-Baptism/IMG6244edited-1/809292159_afgMS-M.jpg

If you want to marry her you'll have to do better
http://rgibbens.smugmug.com/Events/New-Years-Eve-2009/IMG5946edited-1/754369496_pqSK4-M.jpg

[richierich1212]

Hey Rich, nice shots, I like #3 and #4, lol.

[Jeromy]

One of theese fell in to my lap as part of a package deal I bought, I figured it was a dud. But going through a few pages here I am pretty impressed. I will have to put it through it's paces and see what it will do. This thread might have saved it from the b/s section :)

[MichaelBernard]

One of theese fell in to my lap as part of a package deal I bought, I figured it was a dud. But going through a few pages here I am pretty impressed. I will have to put it through it's paces and see what it will do. This thread might have saved it from the b/s section :)

Why would you think it was a dud?