my lens comparison test

[barry lloyd]

OK rough and ready and mainly out of interest. Using a Nikon 810 hand held, I was curious how the Nikon 24-70mm G lens at f2.8 compared with the Tamron 24-70 mm G2 at f2.8
So with everything "settings " the same and distance same, lenses at 70mm.

both photos cropped of a house brick wall

Nikon

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Tamron

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

All I can conclude is the Nikon lens is soft at f2.8 but also it has been "repaired "a couple of times which might account for it.
Ok different f stops may produce different results but f2.8 was the setting I wanted to check

 

[gchappel]

Different sizes, different exposures, hand held- way too many variables for any decision making process. No useful information here. Come to any conclusion you want, but this test supports nothing.
Gary

 

[Palouse]

I agree with Gary.

 

[barry lloyd]

Different sizes, different exposures, hand held- way too many variables for any decision making process. No useful information here. Come to any conclusion you want, but this test supports nothing.
Gary

Maybe so, however I am finding the Tamron lens far better than the Nikon version. I did say a rough and ready test anyway

 

[gchappel]

Good for you, glad you like the tamron. I have shot with some of their g2 glass and have been happy with it as well.
I just do not want others to use your "testing" to make their decision as well. You also mentioned the nikon had been repaired in the past- it really depends on who repaired it. I have tried repairing damaged lenses in the past myself as a challenge- but they were never sharp again.
gary

 

[Palouse]

If I was shooting a static brick wall I would not use a wide open lens. Just saying.

 

[Mike Buckley]

everything "settings " the same and distance same, lenses at 70mm.

Yet the magnification of the second one is more than 50% larger. You mentioned that you cropped both images, but when you presented the images strictly for comparisons the crops should have been much closer to the same if not exactly the same.

 

[barry lloyd]

If I was shooting a static brick wall I would not use a wide open lens. Just saying.

that was because the Nikon lens was the worst at f2..8. Not too bad at otherf stops

 

[mjcmt]

Not a good comparison for me. One is processed slightly differently. Go for Nikon as D810 has in camera vignetting and distortion correction for Nikkor lenses.

 

[drr1531]

Sounds like the author of the OP has made up their mind. But for the benefit of others who may read this I'll point out another issue with the test. Lighting conditions can make a huge difference in the perceived "sharpness" and there is a significance difference in the angle of the lighting between the two images. What we perceive as sharpness is nothing more than contrast. In the second image above the angular lighting causes shadows around the edges of the mortar joints. This results in a perception of a sharper image. It is important when conducting tests of this type that lighting is consistent in both intensity and direction. For any objective comparison the two images above are useless.

 

[barry lloyd]

Ok may not be a fair test agreed. All I can say is that I find the Tamron 24-70mm G2 lens a lot better than my old nikon version, and I am a Nikon fan. Thank you for all your comments and most if not all have pointed out the errors I made in the comparison. Having Image stablisation is a huge benefit for me as I don't have the steadiest of hands. I would have got the latest nikon version but the cost is ridiculously over priced in comparison.
OK I got the Tamron as a "grey" for about £647 where as the Nikon new version from a main dealer is around £1750 so it was a no brainer as we say in the UK. Which would you have got seeing they both do the same job?

 

[gchappel]

I am glad you are satisfied with your choices, go shoot.
Just a comment so future readers do not get confused.
In the first post you noted the nikon lens had been "repaired "a couple of times, so I assume your test copy was not new.
Yet, in the last post you quoted the nikon price for a new lens. Have you tested anything against an actual new copy of the nikon?
It seems all you can really say here is this specific new copy of the Tamron lens is sharper than this specific old nikon lens you found that had been repaired by who knows who several times in the past.
That is kind of like saying my brand new car, brand X, drives better than my friend's old Mercedes that has been in several wrecks.
Again, I like some of the tamron glass. If it meets your price point and you are happy with it- then it can be a good decision for you.
gary

 

[barry lloyd]

As I no longer have the Nikon version I cannot do a retest. Being retired cost is a huge factor in and purchase,so I have to look for the best option. Since I purchased that Tamron lens the company must have realised it was under priced as the next time I looked it had gone up by £100.