One more from the 28-75 Tamron DiXR

[Malaxos1]

Here is another one that shows how sharp this lens is wide open...Dean




http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/view?id=1389094

[wtfmate]

very nice!

I am seriously thinking about getting this lens, ive read so many great reviews about it

[booggerg]

I also found some great full-size samples here

http://www.pbase.com/photoworkszach/tamron_28_75&page=2

[Toogy]

Although they are some nice sharp images, none of them were shot wide open ( 2.8 )

[Andy_T]

Dean,

that is a wonderful photograph of a very beautiful woman!

I think most of us would like to see more of here.

Best regards,
Andy

[bokeh]

Here is another one that shows how sharp this lens is wide open...Dean




http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/view?id=1389094

Dean, excuse the newbie igornace, but why such a high shutter speed - is it to get more DOF? Thanks

[bokeh]

Here is another one that shows how sharp this lens is wide open...Dean




http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/view?id=1389094

Dean, excuse the newbie igornace, but why such a high shutter speed - is it to get more DOF? Thanks

[Toogy]

Yes I am pretty sure that was the idea. Only way he could shoot at F2.8 in that lighting was to use a fast shutter speed.

[Persian-Rice]

The lens is great, getting a good one is hard though. I have heard many comments about how it took several copies before guys could get a good one. Your best bet is to buy one in person and test it.

[Malaxos1]

Yeah, I took the shot at such a high shutter speed because that was what the meter said in such bright light.

[Yan]

The lens is great, getting a good one is hard though. I have heard many comments about how it took several copies before guys could get a good one. Your best bet is to buy one in person and test it.

I am so sold for this lens.. specially need it for this Christmas holiday in Victoria.. however, what Persian Rice has metioned adresses my concern.. worst of all I might do not know enough to evaluate if it is a good copy or not.. which kind of test would you suggest me to do once I get the lens??.. I will try what Persian Rice tried (with mirror) any other way to test??

[Malaxos1]

What camera are you using? While I have shot with the lens wide open for the past year and a half, I was not getting the results that I am now with the 20D...Dean

[Persian-Rice]

Malaxos, it doesn't matter, my lens was defective. I test on two dSLRs and I did a final test on film and it was still messed up.

There is no secret that for whatever reason, this lens tends to be defect prone, all Tamrons do. Their QA is subpar, sometimes people need to send lenses back and forth a few times before they get a good one. I am not the only one on this forum who experienced a 28-75 defect and I am one of many over the online photography communities.

Nevertheless I was happy with build and speed, not comparable to L, but not bad either.

[commando]

Tamron support didn't bother to reply to my email, which isn't a good sign. I've found that the Tamron is much sharper at F8 than F2.8, which is to be expected.

[Andy_T]

One thing ... feel free to hit me :shock: , but ...

... I'm not totally sure whether I really like the bokeh ???.

It seems a bit harsh to me ... what do you feel?
Am I totally nuts or does anyone share this opinion?

Bottom line ... I'd like to see the bokeh of the 24-70/2.8L and Tokina ATX in comparison. Does anyone have sample shots? (If not, I'll have to go browse pbase :lol: )

Best regards,
Andy

[mr.photoguy]

I found this image on pbase...
If the bokeh is bad, I can live with it.
I love the sharpness.
http://misheli.image.pbase.com/u47/photoworkszach/large/30087893.littlerascal.jpg

[Olegis]

My Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 produces very nice bokeh :

http://www.pbase.com/olegis/image/33200272.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/olegis/image/31775203.jpg

[Andy_T]

My Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 produces very nice bokeh :


Oleg,

I agree with you 8)

What was the focal length you used in your pictures?

If you look at Dean's original photo ... apart from that the lady is really stunning ... what do you think of the bokeh?

Best regards,
Andy

[Olegis]

The focal length was 75mm on both photographs.

Personally, I find the bokeh on Dean's photo quite nice. Anyway, it's not worse than the bokeh in the following picture (taken with my 70-200 f/2.8L at 145mm f/2.8) :

http://www.pbase.com/olegis/image/27799778.jpg

[Andy_T]

Personally, I find the bokeh on Dean's photo quite nice. Anyway, it's not worse than the bokeh in the following picture (taken with my 70-200 f/2.8L at 145mm f/2.8) :


That's why I said ... maybe I'm nuts :P

I like the bokeh in your shot better, because the leaves are larger (closer to the monkey).
I find that in Dean's photo, the small harsh contrast draw my eye from the wonderful lady ... maybe that's why I didn't like it. :lol:

So I think the bokeh does not just depend on the lens, but also on the consistency of the background ... dang, that photography thing is even more complicated :roll:

Best regards,
Andy

[Olegis]

So I think the bokeh does not just depend on the lens, but also on the consistency of the background ... dang, that photography thing is even more complicated :roll:

I think you're right - with more "uniform" background (without all the bright spots that is) the out-of-focus area is much more pleasing.

[dsze]

The Tamron 28-75 can't be beat. It is not far from L quality and Persian...I have to disagree with you, or at least question your sources. You say that this lens is prone to defects. Your post is the first one I think I've read that says anything about a defective copy. I've read nothing but GREAT things about this lens and I really could not be happier with mine! I love everything about it, including the $400 price tag! It was my first one as well. It is sharp, fairly fast to focus, nice wide 2.8 and I think has a nice, smooth bokeh. I haven't been disappointed with mine and I've used it for 2 weddings, 2 family portrait shoots and 1 Sr. portrait shoot....not a disappointed client yet either.

-daniel

[Persian-Rice]

Dsze, then you dont research much :D Olegis is another person who needed to change their lens, I have read of this problem on two FM reviews, I have also seen it once or twice in the FM forum.
One of my friends/classmates had a problem with his image quality.
I have seen comments in this regard on two or three other forums as well.

Either UPS likes ot throw boxes that have Tamron on them or Tamron has poor QA.

If I had a nickle for every time I heard "this is an awsome lens as long as you can get a good copy" I would be rich.

[dsze]

Hmm? Maybe I don't research enough. ...but if I had a nickel for everytime I read, "this is a great lens that rivals L lenses," I think I'd be ordering a MkII! I don't think there are any serious problems with Tamron lenses. Lets do a Poll? I'll start one, because I am curious now.

-daniel

[Persian-Rice]

I didnt say its a bad lens, It's an amazing lens from the pictures I have seen, it's just that there seem to be a bunch of bad copies out there.

[Primevci]

The Tamron 28-75 can't be beat. It is not far from L quality and Persian...I have to disagree with you, or at least question your sources. You say that this lens is prone to defects. Your post is the first one I think I've read that says anything about a defective copy. I've read nothing but GREAT things about this lens and I really could not be happier with mine! I love everything about it, including the $400 price tag! It was my first one as well. It is sharp, fairly fast to focus, nice wide 2.8 and I think has a nice, smooth bokeh. I haven't been disappointed with mine and I've used it for 2 weddings, 2 family portrait shoots and 1 Sr. portrait shoot....not a disappointed client yet either.

-daniel

I agree with you i havent used mien as much as you but its a great lens and cant see paying 3 times as much for its L counterpart the onyl people i ever see nocking this lens is someone that has its L coutner part and i understand that also cause if i paid a 1000 for the a lens and then one shows up for only 350something then i would kick myself int he butt or try to make it soudn worse then it ever will be...... althow if i had all L id probly be a disser of anything else...

[commando]

I agree with you i havent used mien as much as you but its a great lens and cant see paying 3 times as much for its L counterpart the onyl people i ever see nocking this lens is someone that has its L coutner part and i understand that also cause if i paid a 1000 for the a lens and then one shows up for only 350something then i would kick myself int he butt or try to make it soudn worse then it ever will be...... althow if i had all L id probly be a disser of anything else...

Dude, can I introduce you to the full stop - ".". It makes sentences far more readable.

[Persian-Rice]

I agree with you i havent used mien as much as you but its a great lens and cant see paying 3 times as much for its L counterpart the onyl people i ever see nocking this lens is someone that has its L coutner part and i understand that also cause if i paid a 1000 for the a lens and then one shows up for only 350something then i would kick myself int he butt or try to make it soudn worse then it ever will be...... althow if i had all L id probly be a disser of anything else...

Dude, can I introduce you to the full stop - ".". It makes sentences far more readable.

haha Ditto.

I don't think that is a fair characterization Primevci. I own the L counterpart, yes the L is better, how much better is subject to argument. It is the general consensus that the Tamron is close to or even equal in terms image quality. However, the L is substantially faster in terms of AF speed. I also noticed that my Tamron was somewhat prone to flare even with the hood on. I am not sure if it was my poor copy, but I can't judge based on a lens with faulty optics. Then there is build quality, I would say the Tamron is good and the L is amazing.

I cant justify paying an extra $1000 unless you are a pro or rich. However, the L is better, to say otherwise is nonsense. The Tamron is an awesome value. It has great optics, which is what really counts. Everything else is a luxury some are willing to pay for.

[JX]

With regards to Persian Rice’s

The lens is great, getting a good one is hard though. I have heard many comments about how it took several copies before guys could get a good one. Your best bet is to buy one in person and test it.

My Canon 70-200 L f2.8 IS was defective right out of the box. I think that bad lens turn up no matter who is the manufacture. I believe it is more luck of the draw. I hope when I order 28-75 Tamron DiXR, I get lucky on the first try.

[Primevci]

Yea sorry about the sentance structure i suck at it i have Dyslexia and it wasent found till later on in life, so i didnt do any good in the reading and writing area anyways i think ill stick to the smaller fourms, this place is turning into photosig and dpreview... But its cool... any time i try to make an argument thats the first thing attacked and i cant blame anyone its so easy with me :) anyways have a nice day and was just voicing my opnion..

[commando]

Yea sorry about the sentance structure i suck at it i have Dyslexia and it wasent found till later on in life, so i didnt do any good in the reading and writing area anyways i think ill stick to the smaller fourms, this place is turning into photosig and dpreview... But its cool... any time i try to make an argument thats the first thing attacked and i cant blame anyone its so easy with me :) anyways have a nice day and was just voicing my opnion..

Sorry about that, it's just really hard to read sentences without full stops. Now I know why I won't bug you about it again :)

[Primevci]

No dude its not your fault and it happens everytime so no reason to say sorry, the problem i had is i was in a hurry and didnt read over the post. It just seems like a people on here are getting to the point if u dotn have L your not a photographer this isnt direced towards anyone either, its just something i notice. I was talking to some people in a chat room and this guy was shareing some photos i was like man what did you use for that and he said some canon point and shoot and this stuff looked top quality.. and don't worry about it like i say its easy to point out, so most the time i don't evan put my opnion on the table "i don't have word isntalled either right now"... anyways seriously have a good day and Happy turkey day thats if you in the USA... if not have a good thursday lol.... And persian i sent my first tamron back Im sure it was fine but the lens box was a little smashed and i didnt feel comfortable...

[samdring]

i think ill stick to the smaller fourms, this place is turning into photosig and dpreview... ..

Nah - stay here - I for one (of many?) thought your comment was valid. Am seriously looking at the Tamron and for what its worth I have had a number of real problems with Canon quality control.

[Andy_T]

Can anyone of the satisfied Tamron 28-75/XR DI users tell me whether it is possible to get good bokeh at the 28 mm setting with the 1:2.8 aperture?
Do you have an example?

The answer is important to me because of a question I posted here (without any replies so far :cry: ):
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=48942

If I want to get only a 28 mm lens as starter lens with my 20D in order to 'improve my photography from the ground up by using only the basics' ... using a 50 mm lens (equivalent) and manual everything for some time, then will I be able to get some creative DOF control with a 1:2.8 lens? Or do I have to go for 28/1.8?

Best regards,
Andy

[commando]

The answer is important to me because of a question I posted here (without any replies so far :cry: ):
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=48942

If I want to get only a 28 mm lens as starter lens with my 20D in order to 'improve my photography from the ground up by using only the basics' ... using a 50 mm lens (equivalent) and manual everything for some time, then will I be able to get some creative DOF control with a 1:2.8 lens? Or do I have to go for 28/1.8?

I saw your other thread but couldn't really help. Since you're casting around for opinions i'll take a shot - remember i'm new to this.

"Good bokeh" is very subjective. There are loads of test shots with this lens around, I think the best idea is to find some and judge for yourself. None of the shots I have will be very useful to you, unfortunately.

Starting with a prime on full manual might be a good way to learn things, but is it really necessary? By taking lots of photos, seeing in the EXIF info what settings that camera uses in Av or Tv mode, i'm learning quickly enough.

[Andy_T]

I saw your other thread but couldn't really help. Since you're casting around for opinions i'll take a shot - remember i'm new to this.

"Good bokeh" is very subjective. There are loads of test shots with this lens around, I think the best idea is to find some and judge for yourself. None of the shots I have will be very useful to you, unfortunately.

OK, maybe let me rephrase this ... I agree with you that 'good bokeh' is very subjective 8)

However, I use a G2 at the moment, and there it is not possible at all (due to the smaller sensor size) to get any bokeh at all :?
(well, a little bit at 100 mm with f/2.5 and a large distance to the subject)

Let me rephrase this ... when you use the Tamron 28-75 XR DI with 28 mm @ 2.8, is it possible to blur the background in order to isolate the subject? I know it's no problem on 50 mm or 75 mm.

Starting with a prime on full manual might be a good way to learn things, but is it really necessary? By taking lots of photos, seeing in the EXIF info what settings that camera uses in Av or Tv mode, i'm learning quickly enough.

I know, that's what I've been doing with my G2 for about 2 years now ... but the other is a theory that holds some charm for me and I thought it might be worth trying it out for some time. The idea would be to invest more planning in every photo you take with regards to exposition and composition. Hell, I might even get a light meter:wink:

Best regards,
Andy

[commando]

The G2 and the 20D are very different beasts. I wouldn't part with my Tamron.

Regarding blurring the background, I can't find a single example of me blurring out the background at 28mm. At 50 or 75mm no problem. I've just never needed to do it. So I can't help you, sorry. I'll make a point of trying it some time, drop me a PM to remind me in a few days if no-one answers your questions.

[Primevci]

ill go threw my shots tommrow and see if i have one at the 28mm.... but nto today got 2 dinners to go to i love devorced parents ahaha....