Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Learning
Photography Q&A
What do you guys think of Tamron 24-70mm G2 lens?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="spb_stan" data-source="post: 683763" data-attributes="member: 43545"><p>I never considered Tamron but had a few Sigma primes, everything else is Nikkor fast lenses. The only Tamron I has any experience with was a Dx plastic zoom and I was not impressed.</p><p>Fast forward a few years and looking for a wide angle zoom for my D800 and several people advised me to hold off on buying the 14-24 2.8 Nikon, generally considered to be one of the best wide angle lenses, prime or Zoom. Instead of paying $1800 I was told by a friend that I should check the 15-30 2.8 zooms and save $600.</p><p></p><p>A local camera store had one in stock I took my camera to the store and tested it for an hour inside the store and walked out with it. It was night by the time I left the store with the new lens but already had the camera mounted and was going to do some nighttime snapshots on the 2-mile walk through the historic city center to my home. A few things really impressed me about that lense obvious even through the VF, the image stabilization is GREAT, better than any lens with VR I have. The second thing that impressed me was the image sharpness and colors. The lack of distortion at 15mm was a welcome surprise. The last thing one would use 15mm for is people shots but it is sharp enough and if you shoot to a midpoint of the torso and axis of the lens parallel with the ground, they looked great particularly with groups shots because at those FL depths of field is deep enough at 2.8 to get a whole room in sharp focus. Just don't get too close to faces because, naturally, the closest parts of the face will be exaggerated and further parts will look smaller. Playboy Magazine famously used wide angle to exaggerate the breast size of models to great effect and is known as the Playboy Effect back in the 60ss and 70s. Back up a couple paced and that effect disappears. The distortion of distance can be very useful for interesting effects by shifting the axis to off center of the scene Getting sharp images at night handheld at 1/2 sec shutter speed is amazing. It is built well, and performs great. That prompted me to look at their 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8. G2 versions to replace my Nikon versions The Nikon 24-70 G series has no VR and the my Nikon 70-200 VR1 has VR but optically is not up to the G or E version while the Tamron 70-200 G2 is half the price and has great reviews. The only problem with the Tamron versions of the Trinity is the current firmware does not work on the Z7. I will wait until it is confirmed that they have been updated to work on the Z series, because the Z is in my plans.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="spb_stan, post: 683763, member: 43545"] I never considered Tamron but had a few Sigma primes, everything else is Nikkor fast lenses. The only Tamron I has any experience with was a Dx plastic zoom and I was not impressed. Fast forward a few years and looking for a wide angle zoom for my D800 and several people advised me to hold off on buying the 14-24 2.8 Nikon, generally considered to be one of the best wide angle lenses, prime or Zoom. Instead of paying $1800 I was told by a friend that I should check the 15-30 2.8 zooms and save $600. A local camera store had one in stock I took my camera to the store and tested it for an hour inside the store and walked out with it. It was night by the time I left the store with the new lens but already had the camera mounted and was going to do some nighttime snapshots on the 2-mile walk through the historic city center to my home. A few things really impressed me about that lense obvious even through the VF, the image stabilization is GREAT, better than any lens with VR I have. The second thing that impressed me was the image sharpness and colors. The lack of distortion at 15mm was a welcome surprise. The last thing one would use 15mm for is people shots but it is sharp enough and if you shoot to a midpoint of the torso and axis of the lens parallel with the ground, they looked great particularly with groups shots because at those FL depths of field is deep enough at 2.8 to get a whole room in sharp focus. Just don't get too close to faces because, naturally, the closest parts of the face will be exaggerated and further parts will look smaller. Playboy Magazine famously used wide angle to exaggerate the breast size of models to great effect and is known as the Playboy Effect back in the 60ss and 70s. Back up a couple paced and that effect disappears. The distortion of distance can be very useful for interesting effects by shifting the axis to off center of the scene Getting sharp images at night handheld at 1/2 sec shutter speed is amazing. It is built well, and performs great. That prompted me to look at their 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8. G2 versions to replace my Nikon versions The Nikon 24-70 G series has no VR and the my Nikon 70-200 VR1 has VR but optically is not up to the G or E version while the Tamron 70-200 G2 is half the price and has great reviews. The only problem with the Tamron versions of the Trinity is the current firmware does not work on the Z7. I will wait until it is confirmed that they have been updated to work on the Z series, because the Z is in my plans. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Learning
Photography Q&A
What do you guys think of Tamron 24-70mm G2 lens?
Top