Any comments on the Tamron 28-75 vs. these others?

[Aylwin]

The new Tamron seems to be the hot lens right now. I'm considering getting one myself but I'd like to know how it compares with these other similar lenses in terms of image quality (sharpness, contrast, resolution, etc.):

Canon 28-135 IS -- it's slower but has IS

Sigma 24-70 -- also f/2.8 but a bit wider which is a plus for me

Sigma 24 -60 -- appears to be newer than the 24-70.

I used to own a 28-135 IS but I sold it. It was actually actually pretty good but I wanted to buy another lense. Actually, I often times wished I had a slightly wider lens. I think 24-70 would be the ideal range of a walk-around lens for me.

If anyone's done tests or is familiar with the above lenses, I'd appreciate any feedback you could provide. Thanks in advance!

[HJMinard]

It has become all the rage, hasn't it? Most owners of the Tamron, including me, think this lens is an incredible value for a fast, very sharp lens. Mileage appears to vary between owners, but mine consistently produces images that compare favorably to my 70-200/4L (which I also love).

Unfortunately I cannot compare to the other lenses you mention as I have not used any of them, but I don't think you can go wrong with the Tamron.

[CyberDyneSystems]

I don't own,. nor have I used the Tamron,

Reports are that the new Sigma 24-60mm is a very good lens too,.. I did try the Sigma 24-70mm and I don't really think it is up to par.

I'd scratch the Sigma 24-70mm off of the list...

As for the 28-135mm... this lens is in a totally different class... variable aperture etc...

Most Tamron owners will tell you beats the 28-135mm hands down... it certainly does in the spec dept.

[phili1]

I have it and use it for my portrait business, it produces great pictures you can't go wrong.

[chops]

The new Tamron seems to be the hot lens right now. I'm considering getting one myself but I'd like to know how it compares with these other similar lenses in terms of image quality (sharpness, contrast, resolution, etc.):

Canon 28-135 IS -- it's slower but has IS

Sigma 24-70 -- also f/2.8 but a bit wider which is a plus for me

Sigma 24 -60 -- appears to be newer than the 24-70.

I used to own a 28-135 IS but I sold it. It was actually actually pretty good but I wanted to buy another lense. Actually, I often times wished I had a slightly wider lens. I think 24-70 would be the ideal range of a walk-around lens for me.

If anyone's done tests or is familiar with the above lenses, I'd appreciate any feedback you could provide. Thanks in advance!

Do you think either one of those Sigma lenses or the Canon 28-135 IS lens compares equally to Canon's 24-70 f/2.8 L lens?

No?!

Well, believe it or not, the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 lens DOES indeed compare to the Canon 24-70 L lens.

You may want to check out a thread I started about the Tamron lens you're asking about. There's quite a few full-size sample pictures and a lot of talk about this great lens.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=46708

[Adam Hicks]

Yeah I have to say that the only Sigma lens I ever see myself owning will be the 120-300 2.8. Otherwise I just haven't been impressed with any of their stuff. I thought I'd be a 'Canon only' kinda guy, but I couldn't argue with the 28-75's reputation, quality and value. I've had mine for about a year now and it's as good as new, with a nice long warranty to boot!

It won't hold it's resale as well on eBay, but probably would around the photo forums around those that know!

Adam