Nikon 16-35 f/4 or Tamron 15-30 f/2.8

I want to buy a wide angle for my D810 and I'm torn between these two lens. I have a Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 and love it. I also have a Nikon 24-120 f/4 and love that to, so I know I'll be getting a good lens either way. I don't care about the "no filter" on the Tamron. I was wondering what people think either way. They are both almost the same price so it's not a money issue. I shoot landscapes primarily and I just need something wider. Any thoughts?
 

Osantacruz

Senior Member
I want to buy a wide angle for my D810 and I'm torn between these two lens. I have a Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 and love it. I also have a Nikon 24-120 f/4 and love that to, so I know I'll be getting a good lens either way. I don't care about the "no filter" on the Tamron. I was wondering what people think either way. They are both almost the same price so it's not a money issue. I shoot landscapes primarily and I just need something wider. Any thoughts?
I haven't tried the other lens but I have the 15-30mm and I love it! No regrets getting that lens. Sharp, quick and reliable.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
 

TedG954

Senior Member
I have the Nikon 16-35/4 for my D800. I have pretty much delegated it to being a "walk around" lens. I prefer my 24/1.4 (but would recommend the less expensive 20/1.8), the 50/1.8, and 85/1.8, as a kit. The 3 lenses aren't much heavier than the 16-35 and I have better range, in distance and light conditions. I'm not familiar with Tamron products.
 

NealB

Senior Member
I have the Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 and you can't go wrong with it. The one thing that may or may not be a issue for you is that it is a big heavy lens. Unfortunately I have not spent a lot of time with since I have had a couple strokes over the last year. I hoping to get out shortly and it will be in my.
 
Thank you for the input. I'm still on the fence as to which one to buy. I think I'm going to rent the Tamron 15-30 this weekend and shoot around with it. The one thing about the Tamron that concerns me is the size and weight.
 

nzswift

Senior Member
I've got the Nikkor 16-35mm and use it for real estate photography. Performs fabulously!!! Some distortion with verticals but one click in LR and it's perfect....
 
I took the Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 out today for a test run. It's a fantastic lens. It's incredibly sharp though out the range of the lens and the colors are fantastic. The only problem for me is, it's extremely heavy for a walk around lens. It's a full pound heavier than the Nikon 16-35 f/4 and a couple of ounces heavier than the Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 non VC. If the weight is not a problem for you I can't recommend the lens enough. Today I purchased the Nikon 16-35 f/4 from B&H. I know it's just as good as the Tamron but lighter. Thank you everyone for the help in deciding on what lens to buy.
 

Bill16

Senior Member
Congrats! I have the 14-24mm and I love it! I hope you will love your wide angle lens too! :D

I took the Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 out today for a test run. It's a fantastic lens. It's incredibly sharp though out the range of the lens and the colors are fantastic. The only problem for me is, it's extremely heavy for a walk around lens. It's a full pound heavier than the Nikon 16-35 f/4 and a couple of ounces heavier than the Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 non VC. If the weight is not a problem for you I can't recommend the lens enough. Today I purchased the Nikon 16-35 f/4 from B&H. I know it's just as good as the Tamron but lighter. Thank you everyone for the help in deciding on what lens to buy.
 

salukfan111

Senior Member
I want to buy a wide angle for my D810 and I'm torn between these two lens. I have a Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 and love it. I also have a Nikon 24-120 f/4 and love that to, so I know I'll be getting a good lens either way. I don't care about the "no filter" on the Tamron. I was wondering what people think either way. They are both almost the same price so it's not a money issue. I shoot landscapes primarily and I just need something wider. Any thoughts?
Considering there is nothing the 16-35 does better than that 15-30 tamron it seems to be an easy choice. One could (many have actually) argue the Tamron blows the 14-24 out of the water.
 

Fortkentdad

Senior Member
Don't have either but the Tammy 15-30mm is on my LLL - Lens Lust List. From what I've read it is one heck of a lens. I have a couple of older ultra wides - both Tamron and dang, they work fine, no "need" to replace them.
 

TedG954

Senior Member
The Nikon 16-35/4 is an excellent lens and I highly recommend it.

_1538CMA  8-28-2015.jpg

_1543CMA  8-28-2015.jpg

_1555CMA  8-28-2015.jpg
 

Vincent

Senior Member
The subject is relvant for me, so I looked through the posts.

...Today I purchased the Nikon 16-35 f/4 from B&H. ...
I bought the Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 instead of the Nikon 16-35 f/4....

It would be good to have an indication what happened between the posts, weight not that much of an issue?

I have the 16-35 f4 on the wish list since I want to use filters.
I have a Tokina 11-16 f2.8 (usable on 16mm on FX), a Vivitar 19-35mm f3.5-4.5 (cheaply bought, light I`ll keep it) and almost fell for a 20-35mm f2.8 second hand recently.

I also tend to think the 11-16mm is my ultrawide DX lens (so no 14-24 needed), so a 17-35mm f2.8 would be ideal, but overkill for my usage. I`m finally more tempted by the 20mm f1.8 to add a AF prime to my series. BTW the reqirement for me would be Nikon brand (my widest Nikon is 50mm).
 

jay_dean

Senior Member
This was my unscientific test with the 14-24 vs the the 16-35. This was about a 200% crop (possibly more, not got the full sized images anymore) both at f4. The 14-24 is better than the 16-35, but does not blow it out of the water, the 16-35 is a terrific lens.
Image 1. 14-24mm Image 2. 16.35mm
14-24.jpg
16-35b.jpg
 
Last edited:

Steve Millward

Senior Member
I've recently bought the 16-35mm f/4 VR. Used, but in pristine condition, £600 delivered.

Went for this over the 14-24mm or the Tamron 15-30mm as I can use my 100mm Lee Filter system with it. It's also smaller and lighter (and a LOT cheaper than the 14-24).

Very happy with the lens. Nowhere near as sharp as my 24-70mm, but it's not far behind.
 
Last edited:

todd7500

Senior Member
I've recently bought the 16-35mm f/4 VR. Used, but in pristine condition, £600 delivered.

Went for this over the 14-24mm or the Tamron 15-30mm as I can use my 100mm Lee Filter system with it. It's also smaller and lighter (and a LOT cheaper than the 14-24)

Very happy with the lens. Nowhere near as sharp as my 24-70mm, but it's not far behind.

Sorry I'm a bit confused... the 24/70... Nikon or Tamron? I'm looking for the sharpest.
Thanks Cheers
 

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
Sorry I'm a bit confused... the 24/70... Nikon or Tamron? I'm looking for the sharpest.
Thanks Cheers
If sharpness is your main concern, you'd better get a few prime lenses. They usually over perform any zoom lens.
 
Top