For anyone that did a comparison or research, what are the advantages to this lens over the Tamron SP 28-75mm d/2.8 XR lens? (using a Nikon D600)
1337629
Image quality between the 24-70 and 28-75 is leaps and bounds. The 24-70 is just as sharp as Canons 24-70 version. Not to mention having VC. Definitely worth it if you have the money. I owned the 28-75 and it was a great lens for what is was but the 24-70 is such a step up in my opinion. Cheers
2240581
Thank you Very much for your Help, what do you think about the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II and the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM? If you had the money for only one general purpose lens, wich one will you chose?
1803406
I had a D40 before the D60, the D60 is MUCH better, just my personal thoughts 1-Dust, if you live in a dusty environment is a BIG ONE 2-Active D-light, Say good bye to underexposed photos, the camera produces very consistent results, not so with the D40 3-Expeed produced lower noise at higher ISO 4-THE VR Lens is SOOO much worth it, my pictures are always sharp I considered the D80, but... 1-No Active D-light "a big one" 2-more focus points yes, but you can do anything with 3 if you use them well 3-the D80 has a motor, but Nikon will be updating most of this primes to AFS this year, I tried the camera motor its slowwww 4-I was planing to get the D80+50mm 1.4 lens for low light, got the sigma 30mm 1.4 its a much better lens to keep on the camera IMHO 5-Expeed processing on the D60 seems to produce more saturated/vivid pictures vs.. D80 I shoot RAW/convert with capture NX, tried all the options, capture NX is slow and ugly, but it gives you the BEST picture period.
1526808
Have not tried the tamron the cannon 24-70 2.8L II . Is a a purchase I'll never regret. It holds up against my friends zeiss primes plus blazing fast auto focus
316100
Sharp lens, at 120mm its longer than the 1.8 45mm, which works out to 90mm. It is a bit slower, but just as sharp. Yes and no, it gets you close from the edges of a room, head shots are fine, its a cheaper alternative to the oly 75mm.The 25mm 1.8 might be more useful, I have the sigma 60. Do it all would be the pro zoom, but its pricy. The sigma would be great on the old, at the price it'd hard to beat. If you do not have many primes, its a good start.
284748
Its interesting that you should ask. I have a friend who owns a D800 and has both DX and Full Frame lenses. He says his DX lenses work just fine on the camera automatically (no adjustment). I would think that the D600 does the same. The only thing I'm not sure of is the effective pixel reduction (if any) because a smaller amount of the sensor is being exposed. NIKON must have some literature on this and I've found that Thom Hogan ("ByThom") is really good at responding to questions like this. I have used this lens for a couple of years now and it produces spectacular images on my D300. The question is whether you are willing to sacrifice the effective range with the crop factor that would still happen regardless of whether the camera you are using is full frame or DX -- that is the effective DX range is 16.5-24. You could just buy one of the other excellent 12-24 lenses out there and have the full frame wide field. But those are a lot more expensive and as Rockwell has pointed out, this is the sharpest lens in its class and having used it for some time, I think he's right.
2058089
The quality of the 60-250 is stellar but low light sports is not it's best use. If the Tamron has excellant optics, the f2.8 should be better for your needs. Check The lens reviews to see how the Tamron performs wide open. DXO Mark is informative.
1747515
Ya the D60 actually manually focuses easier than the D40 because the D40 is just a green dot that shows up when its in focus. You might also want to check out the Sigma 30mm 1.4 HSM. That one automatically focuses on the D 40/60 models.
1786217
Thanks for the information. I'm definately looking to unload the 28-80. I hadn't thought about third party lenses. I was always told to stick with Nikon. I'll check out the Sigma.
2118676
hihave to say . for the hype and good looks of this lens i was a tad unhappy and found it a bit soft .i have since sold it on . purchased the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 ( first verdion non VR which is optically better ! ) and WOW !! this lens never leaves my camera and is tak sharp and fast with great bokeh . No competition this tamron and the new tamron 70-300 VR are simply killers . The Tamrom 17-50mm f2.8 for the money is the best out there ( in my view )
357723
I spent many months comparing 28-300 and this 24-120 before I settle with this. I was looking for a walk around lenses for travel and family picture because I don't want my f2.8 lenses to take all the fun out of the trip as they are heavy and big. To my surprise, this 24-120 replaced my 24-70 f2.8 except for shooting sports as the AF is not as snappy as the 24-70 f2.8 and I need to shoot more frames to cherry pick the ones that are in focus. Other than sports, my copy of 24-120 f4 has taken over the job of 24-70 f2.8. I used it at weddings and senior pictures...... I am very happy with it. I got it in "brand new white box" for about half the price and that's even a greater deal. I spent many months comparing 28-300 and this 24-120 before I settle with this. I was looking for a walk around lenses for travel and family picture because I don't want my f2.8 lenses to take all the fun out of the trip as they are heavy and big. To my surprise, this 24-120 replaced my 24-70 f2.8 except for shooting sports as the AF is not as snappy as the 24-70 f2.8 and I need to shoot more frames to cherry pick the ones that are in focus. Other than sports, my copy of 24-120 f4 has taken over the job of 24-70 f2.8. I used it at weddings and senior pictures...... I am very happy with it.... » Read More I spent many months comparing 28-300 and this 24-120 before I settle with this. I was looking for a walk around lenses for travel and family picture because I don't want my f2.8 lenses to take all the fun out of the trip as they are heavy and big. To my surprise, this 24-120 replaced my 24-70 f2.8 except for shooting sports as the AF is not as snappy as the 24-70 f2.8 and I need to shoot more frames to cherry pick the ones that are in focus. Other than sports, my copy of 24-120 f4 has taken over the job of 24-70 f2.8. I used it at weddings and senior pictures...... I am very happy with it. I got it in "brand new white box" for about half the price and that's even a greater deal. « Show Less
369535
I own the D80 with 18-135 lens and love it. Yes, you sacrifice a tad of fabulousness by picking the lens with the broader range, but I wanted bang-for-buck versatility first. I recommend getting at least *one* of the Nikon-Nikkor lenses, since they have proprietary circuitry that (I believe) the after-markets don't. The one thing you'd gain by starting with the 18-55 lens is that it *is* quite a bit smaller. I hate to mention it here, but I found - post-purchase - my local (Atlanta) membership w'house had a kit with *both* lenses for less than I paid for the body + lens.
558459
This lens is second to none. It has great contrast and clarity even at f/2.8. It has low distortion, focuses quickly, accepts filters, and works on full-frame cameras as well as "cropped sensor" DX ones. And if you hit someone with it, they'll probably go down. If you have a DX camera, you can save money by compromising on some of those features. Tokina's 16-50 f/2.8 DX lens is well-regarded and perhaps the closest to the Nikon 17-35. It's supposedly sharp and has good contrast both wide open and stopped down. It's solidly built. Landscape shooters like it. $600 Nikon's 12-24 f/4G DX lens is also very good. It might be too wide for you. $1000 Nikon's 16-85 f/3.5-5.6 DX is good, though not in the same class. $675 Note that I have experience only with the 17-35 (bought used). The rest is based on conversations with people who own those lenses.
1589714
As far as I understand it, the Tamron AF 28-75 is a full frame lens. Thus if you have a digital camera with a crop sensor (Canon Xti, T2i, T3i, T4i, 7D) it will actually magnify the lens to be 1.6x greater turning the lens into a 45-120mm. This is not the wide to just over standard lens that most people want for an all around lens. However, may be great for a portrait lens. The 17-55 is a crop sensor lens and is thus equivlent to a 27-80mm lens on a 35mm camera which is the sweet spot for the all around lens. If you have a full frame camera (35mm film, Canon 1D, 5D), then this 17-50 will not work on the camera. It has smaller optics that will not drape light over a full size 35mm frame and will cause severe vignetting on those cameras. Otherwise, I understand that optics are similar overall. I admittedly returned my 17-50mm due to some pretty severe back focusing issues on two seperate copies of the lens. From what I have read this may not be as much of an issue on the 28-75 and if I was willing to wait, I hear the Tamron customer service is pretty good about servicing these lenses. However, I ultimately went with the Sigma 17-50 with the IS, and have been more than satisfied except for the additional $100 cost.
2077809
The 24-120 f/4 is a great "walking around" lens. It has all the goodies; Nano Glass, VR2 and fantastic resolution and speed. Works very well with mt D800's 36 megapixel resolution. Great for handheld shots. It's not a lightweight, but, IMHO, relatively easy to carry. You'll not be disappointed with the pictures. If you can, try it with your camera for weight and balance.
1417502
I found that I had not been pleased with the focus at times on my D7000. I purchased The SpyderLensCal and it confirmed on multiple lens's that it was backfocusing.. All lens's were in the back focus category... I am very pleased with the results... Waiting for nice weather to calibrate my Tamron 150-600 and i suspect it will be in the same category as the other lens's...
632571
I have a 40D and plan a Europe trip with the intention of taking one lens, with the same choice. Questions are: Image quality at either end of the range? Macro quality, build quality? The utility of an additional 50mm of the Tamron?Critical perhaps is stabilisation with Sigma. Can anyone advise?