Tamron 28-75 F2.8 XR Di test shots all at F2.8 (11 images)

[chops]

Yep, that's right! All of these following images were taken with the lens wide open at F2.8. If you ask me, they all look extremely sharp. I tried focusing on their eyes, but as you know, cats don't stay still for very long. But, you can see where the sharpest part of the images are, and they are sharp! :D

http://chops.tzo.com/IMG_8849.jpg

http://chops.tzo.com/IMG_8845.jpg

http://chops.tzo.com/IMG_8842.jpg

http://chops.tzo.com/IMG_8840.jpg

http://chops.tzo.com/IMG_8822.jpg

http://chops.tzo.com/IMG_8821.jpg

http://chops.tzo.com/IMG_8818.jpg

http://chops.tzo.com/IMG_8814.jpg

http://chops.tzo.com/IMG_8807.jpg

http://chops.tzo.com/IMG_8803.jpg

http://chops.tzo.com/IMG_8797.jpg

[Olegis]

Quite sharp indeed.
The 5th image seems to be focused on the nose instead the eyes.

[Canuck]

No worries on #5 it is just some back-focus! J/K!!! :evil: :twisted: :lol:

Those are some sharp pics though.

[chops]

Yes, #5 was focused on his nose.

FYI: If you look closely, there are a total of SIX different cats. #1, 3, and 8 are the same cat, #9 and 10 are of another same cat, but is its twin. #4 and 11 is the same cat, and this one weighs 38lbs! These are all of my friend's cats, and that fat one was like that when she got him several years ago. He squeaks when he meows. They are all very friendly and always wants to be petted.

[Andy_T]

Chops,

you have a lot of cats :lol:

Best regards,
Andy

[chops]

Chops,

you have a lot of cats :lol:

Best regards,
Andy

One can never have enough pu.... umm, never mind. :twisted: :lol:

However, they are not mine, but my friend's.

[Gerdav43]

Chops,

I noticed all your pictures had a portrait feel to them in that the subject was very clear and the background was blurred. In your third picture the view is blurred by the time you reach the felines' neck. Is this your intent or a function of the lense being wide open at 2.8? I'm interested in the lense as a walkaround and wanted to know a) what do you think of this for that puropose? and b) is the lense (from my understanding which of course is probably wrong) always being wide open at 2.8 cause many of your pictures to have this effect?

Thanks for posting the pictures here for us to see.

[rkoshy]

Chops,

I noticed all your pictures had a portrait feel to them in that the subject was very clear and the background was blurred. In your third picture the view is blurred by the time you reach the felines' neck. Is this your intent or a function of the lense being wide open at 2.8? I'm interested in the lense as a walkaround and wanted to know a) what do you think of this for that puropose? and b) is the lense (from my understanding which of course is probably wrong) always being wide open at 2.8 cause many of your pictures to have this effect?

Thanks for posting the pictures here for us to see.

What you've noticed is the DOF.... essentially, the depth of the area in focus is inversely related to the aperture. So you open up the lens (i.e. smaller f stop) the smaller the DOF, and vice-versa.

I've recently purchased this lens, and definitely recommend it for a walk-around lens...

Hope this helps.

[Toogy]

What ISO where these taken at? I assume no flash was used?

[hank1105]

Chops - thanks for posting these pics, I wasn't sure about purchasing this lens given the feedback on my other post - but these are definitely sharp pictures. Like Toogy asked, there was no flash used, right?

Hank

[chops]

I don't know why everyone thinks I took these pictures without flash. You can see the flash in every one of the cats eyes in each picture. I just used the built-in flash.

These images are just as they came out of the camera, only resized to 800 and that's it.

Every picture was taken with these settings.....

ISO - 100
AV - F2.8
TV - 1/60 sec
Flash - On
Flash Compensation - Minus 1 stop
Exposure Compensation - Plus 1 stop

These settings do make for a very natural lighting look. And if you notice, there's very little "pet eye". (animal version of red eye) :wink:

[sparker1]

The evidence of flash is there in most of the shots, not only highlights in the eyes, but soft shadows. The fact that everyone assumed no flash is a compliment to your technique and settings.

[chops]

The evidence of flash is there in most of the shots, not only highlights in the eyes, but soft shadows. The fact that everyone assumed no flash is a compliment to your technique and settings.

Well thank you everyone! :D I probably should have picked up on that, but being new and all... :oops:

Anyway, I dropped the flash compensation one stop to keep from blowing out the highlights, and bumped up the exposure compensation one stop to help bring out the background a little more.

One thing I have learned over the last few years is that proper exposure is everything, especially with digital. :wink:

[IcePlanet]

I know that I'm reopening old topic...

I have just received my Tamron 28-75/2.8 (i have Canon EOS 350D) and made few shots. The sharpness presented as big + of this lens i can not see. Below you can see 1:1 crops (2MB each, first crop in each file is from Canon 18-55 kit lens):
http://www.ice.sk/testing/ObjektivTest_28mm_CanonTamron.tif
http://www.ice.sk/testing/ObjektivTest_55mm_CanonTamron.tif

Focus was auto on manually selected middle point and ISO 100.
From the pictures i think it is much worse than kit lens 18-55 (on top in the crops). Based on all reviews i have found i think that the one piece i get is somehow 'bad' can you please look at the pictures and confirm my opinion?

Thank you very much..