Question about Tamaron

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by mdruiz, Sep 28, 2008.

  1. mdruiz

    mdruiz

    491
    Feb 18, 2008
    Orlando, FL
    Tamron SP AF 17-35 mm F/2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical (IF)
    Tamron SP AF 28-75 mm F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)
     
  2. rotxlk82

    rotxlk82

    Jul 20, 2007
    UK
    I don't really get your question... what do you want to know?

    I assume you're looking for a reccomendation between those two lenses, the choice depends really on what you want to shoot.
     
  3. alemmo

    alemmo

    Sep 23, 2008
    Baltimore
    yeah not much of a question but those 2 lenses cover different focal lengths.

    You might also want to look at the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8. Right now that is what I am looking at.

    I just took some shots at my friends wedding and have been amazed at the quality I got from the Tamron 90mm 2.8 and not as impressed with the NIkon 18-105mm kit lens on my Nikon D90.

    So i'm looking at the Sigma 18-50mm 2.8, Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 and the Nikon 17-55mm 2.8 (this one will take a bit more time to save up for).
     
  4. mdruiz

    mdruiz

    491
    Feb 18, 2008
    Orlando, FL
    ever want to type something..and not type it. Im looking for opinion. Sorry
     
  5. PeteZ28

    PeteZ28

    Oct 5, 2007
    Newtown, PA
    Neither of them will focus on your D40 FYI. The D90 will be fine.

    I have the 17-35. It's OK, nothing specacular, but at 1/4 the price of the Nikon 17-35 I feel I got more than I paid for.
     
  6. That's not true. Tamron has put a focus motor into the 28-75.
     
  7. mdruiz

    mdruiz

    491
    Feb 18, 2008
    Orlando, FL
    What about quality? Lens and pictures
     
  8. bett

    bett

    Mar 31, 2007
    New Hampshire
    I'm quite pleased with my 28-75 2.8 "tammy"
    I shoot mainly my kids and family stuff, and it certainly
    gives me results I'm happy with.
     
  9. mdruiz

    mdruiz

    491
    Feb 18, 2008
    Orlando, FL
    Once of the reason why I ask, is I want to get into Wedding Photography. I know I need "fast" lenses. At the moment, I cant afford the Nikkor version. Im thinking, this is a good starting point, getting the Tamaron versions
     
  10. rotxlk82

    rotxlk82

    Jul 20, 2007
    UK
    I know the so called 'Beast' and the modern 24-70/2.8 AFS are expensive but have you looked at the older Nikkor 35-70/2.8 they can be had pretty cheaply nowadays.

    I don't know how it compares to the Tamron 28-75 but the Nikon certainly has a good following around here.
     
  11. I have the Tamron 28-75 (Built in motor). Its is quite slow in AF and a bit noisy too when focusing on my D40. But I can live with the PQ it gives me! Very nice and sharp!
     
  12. You do not say what subjects you wish to photograph, which is the motivator for considering a new lens. As you already own an 18-55mm, the Tamron 17-35mm would duplicate most of it's range. If you need a wider range for landscapes, architecture, etc, a lens in the range of 10-24mm would be more useful. Nikon, Tamron, Sigma & Tokina have lenses within this range. Select one that will work with your D40,
    Regards
     
  13. mdruiz

    mdruiz

    491
    Feb 18, 2008
    Orlando, FL
    I understand the focal length is the same...but the speed isnt.
     
  14. Once I saw a quick comparison between them (35-70 and 28-75) here... can't remeber who did a better job but both did very well :wink:
     
  15. Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 is an oft overlooked lens for the D40. It's a VERY good lens with fairly quick AF (has a motor but I don't think it's true AF-S). Nice range for DX. Probably the best value I used on DX in that range.
     
  16. Mike,

    I can't say anything about the 17-35. But I have the (pre-motor) version of the 28-70 2.8. I love this lens. It is my main lens that I use. The IQ is excellent. I highly recommend this lens.
     
  17. mdruiz

    mdruiz

    491
    Feb 18, 2008
    Orlando, FL

    Any new lens I will use on my d90
     
  18. mdruiz

    mdruiz

    491
    Feb 18, 2008
    Orlando, FL
    more and more post I see , the 17-50 2.8...is a great lens...
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 3, 2008