I have this lens for my D7200 and absolutely love the image quality I get out of it (most of the time)... I've had the lens for two months now and have shot 2000+ images with it. That said, I did just do a shoot with low natural light shooting at slower shutter speeds and noticed I have an issue with the VC in my lens. Starting at 1/200th of a second (very apparent at 1/125th down) and slower the images are actually sharper with the VC off rather than on. This also happened with a brand new 24-70 that my local camera shop had as well as with Tamron's new 45mm 1.8. I just returned the 45mm since it was still in the return window and have sent the 24-70 in for warranty repair. We'll see if they fix the issue. I suggest that if you get this lens (or any Tamron VC lens for that matter), you immediately find yourself a brick wall, stand 8-12 ft away, shoot it in Aperture Priority at f/8 with the VC turned on and walk your shutter speed down from 1/1000th to 1/60th and see if you notice any soft images. Here's a link to a google drive folder where you can visually see what I am talking about. drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B4FGnwswPW_VRkNicVhZT1U1WVk&usp=sharing
Tony, when doing lens reviews don't you think you should use a tripod for the photos where VR is not in the equation? I particularly felt this from your focus breathing test while trying to stand in the same spot. Yes, you are probably right that tamron focal length is not calibrated as accurately as nikon but the amount could be made marginally better or worse due to body movement in your experiment. I think experimental parts of the review should be as scientific as possible.
I've got the Tamron lens on my D800E and I love it! Only thing though is that the moving part of the lens actually wobbles a bit and makes a bunch of thudding noises and when I move it with my hand while the camera is in live view, I notice the black corners actually move around (but very little) too. But other than that, highly recommend the Tamron if you want to save a bit of money. I'm Looking for a nice 50mm too and looking to just go for the little cheap Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D. Maybe when I'm free :)
Many people upgrade to these pro-grade lenses to get sharper images, not at the center of the frame, but towards the corners. It's a bit surprising that you don't compare off-center sharpness. Choosing a scene with lots of moving subjects for testing low shutter speed image sharpness is also a bit awkward. Bokeh quality comparison would have been a great addition as well.
The Tamron is a fantastic lens. For people photography, sharpness in the corners isn't much of an issue, in my experience. At shorter focal lengths, you avoid your subject to be in the corners because of distortion. Towards 70, it may be an issue. Bokeh... That's a purely subjective thing. If you want, go to the Flickr group and look through some images taken with the lens. I personally find the bokeh of the Tamron very pleasing, especially if the out of focus background is greenery with some patches of sunlight. It's just beautiful, IMHO!
Surprised as the G from Nikon should have superb sharpness in the middle compared to most of the lenses, even the new E one... Might be the AF a little off in the asylum photo?Wanna have a lens for a concerts in a bad light and wonder if should I go tamron G2 or Nikon G in that AF consistency regard... Of course VR would be welcome for convenient landscape photos, but can have tripod with me...
The Tamron 24-70 will be my next lens! I have the Tamron 70-200 2.8. I love it!!! $1000 less than the Nikon, with better quality! Thanks Tony and Chelsea (and Danny D.) for the great review. You guys are the best!
Hello Tony and Chelsea. I like your reviews. But I am a bit irritated about your comments on focus breathing and magnification. Tamron stated in their specs that the maximum magnification of the 24-70 f2.8 is 1:5 while the Nikon offers 1:3,7. Taking into account the same focus distance it should be pretty clear that there has to be a difference and the Tamron is certainly more wide angle. Around ~25 % more to be precise. So your result just confirms the technical specification.
Ralf O Focus breathing and magnification aren't necessarily related. Focal length at close distances is an important factor for many photographers, so we always test and disclose it.
Tony Northrup Indeed, Nikon Micro-Nikkor lenses have this "feature". The 60mm lens is not too bad (actual focal length 55mm) but the 105mm is about 78mm) and the 200mm Micro-Nikkor is just 125mm when the magnification is 1:1.
Yeah, I would definitely give the Tamron a go. The colour and contrast is fine. Slight flare is acceptable. I don't really like this range so saving $600 for another lens sounds great to me. Great lens to shoot events in dark places.
I have a few lenses now in my collection my latest addition was the Tamron 24-70 I love it and it's my go to Lense if I'm forced to just take one with me. Yes the price is still over 1k but it's worth it. You won't be disappointed.
In the sharpness test with the cone shaped tiled roof the tiled seemed to have better contrast and slightly better sharpness to me. Minor detail. Nice video.
I was going to get a 50mm prime lens. However, I have made my decision to get the 24-70mm Tamron. Yours and +Matt Granger was the final "snapshot" I needed to complete my "series" as I have been researching like mad to figure out my next lens. Being that I am going into the portrait realm of photography, this lens seems like the best bang for buck in comparison to everything else I have looked at for my D5300. I know realize it is a cropped sensor but it's also a pro lens, and I need that for the next level for when I do get a full frame body. We can't all buy $1.5k lenses. So this will be a stellar investment being I'm buying used and looking forward to the long haul. Thanks again for a thorough review of this lens, and I will continue watching viewing your channel for future additions.
I respect this review but I will still go with the Nikon 24-70mm. Ihave seen all the DXO Mark test as well as other sites. The final choice for me is "resale" value. The Tamron doesn't have much of a resale value as compared to the Nikon. So in the end if I decide I made a mistake trying to become a pro photographer, I know I will get about a 3/4 return on my dollar with the Nikon. Again, great video but I think the point I mentioned should be factored in.
Tony, you ditched the Golden Dome for Burnt Orange. This is a problem. Beyond that, another great review. You guys are one of the only shutterbugs on net that INSIST on comparing apples to apples. Most reviewers choose to gloss over focus breathing, full-frame/crop lens aperture differences, etc but you don't drink the propaganda or bath water. You cant argue mathematics. Price is a different metric and Im glad you always separate the price argument from the performance argument until its relevant to the discussion.
Great video as always - thanks! One thing I would have liked was a comment on the real world implications of the focus breathing. I understand the issue, but how bad is it for e.g. portrait use in a real world scenario? Usually I would prefer to be at least 1.5-2 meters (5-7 ft) from my subject in order to prevent those crazy "big-nose" distortions, and it would be interesting to know how much of an issue the focus breathing is at that distance? Is the effective focal length still significantly shorter? You mentioned an effective focal lenght of 64 mm (I think it was) when doing the VR test - was that shot at the 70 mm mark on the Tamron?
Sharp wide open and able to hand hold at crazy low speeds makes me really really want this lens. And it's 900 euro cheaper than the canon (Ireland). Also makes it an interesting choice for video with the VC.
I would think most ppl would rank sharpness high up on their list of what is important. That plus good image stabilization made Tamron the easy choice for me.
"The Tamron is definitely not 70mm. It's something..(pause)..shorter". Love the Carl Sagan / William Shatner pauses Tony 😀. Kidding aside, keep up the good work. Your knowledge keeps us dedicated enthusiasts informed. Thanks for all you and Chelsea do.
Well, I liked my Tamron 70-200 vc so much that I ordered the Tamron 24-70. The VC and focus along with price with rebate made the decision pretty easy. Wasn't easy to go away from Nikon lenses, but not a pro either.
I'm still undecided between the 2, but sharpness is the only thing I care about. You said a few times that the Tamron is a bit sharper, but Cameralabs did a real-world comparison and showed that the Nikon was way sharper, especially on the corners?
+Herp McDerpington I have seen people test several copies of one particular model lens and find them quite different. I also head people talk about the very good sharpness of the Nikon, but I cannot compare the Tamron and the Nikon, simply because I don’t have access to the Nikon. I am very happy with the Tamron. If I had to, I’d replace it with the same lens. Anyway, the 24-70 would be my main work horse. I’m into people photography, so it is often rather the expression of the subject, or the moment I try to capture. There is a bit of vignetting, which doesn’t bother me. I certainly cannot complain about lack of sharpness of the Tamron.
Videos I would like to see in the future from you guys: Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 vs Sigma 24-105mm f4. Also: Data management. How do you organize and store the many many GBs you get from shooting a lot ? What harddrives, cloud services etc. do you use how do you manage everything. Love your videos and books !
fetze Good suggestions, I'll put them on the list. Re: Tamron vs Sigma, I use the Tamron for events (like a wedding reception) where I need the extra stop. For everything else, I prefer the Sigma. We mostly just use the Sigma. For data, I just keep buying the biggest USB 3 hard drives, filling them up, making an extra copy, and storing it off-site. No cloud service is affordable, and there's not enough bandwidth for all our data.
Kevin Good when he was working with the "WOMP" channel agreed that in the lineup of Canon, Nikon, Tamron and Sigma. Tamron's 24-70 2.8 just straight out out performed the others in very important categories. Its an amazing lens at that price compared to the competition. Do you think Sigma will come out with an Art version of the 24-70 and 70-200 with OS?
yes they will, but the question is when, and not sure if the 24/70 will have IS, but maybe it will be even faster then f2.8, but i'm more looking forward to the new 85 f1.4 ART witch I think might be out before the zooms, but I could be wrong
I think you are right about the 85 I heard rumor that Sigma's art version of the 24-70 may actually be an F/2 lens and will have OS.. That would be a very serious contender if the price is right
Hi tony. I own both lenses. I got the tamron thinking it would be good for video. But now i use it all the time for photography, it's lighter, sharper and the VC is amazing. One thing though, and its my only but with this lens. Autofocus is slower, and in low light it's even slower and half as accurate,
Wouldn't the focus breathing test be better on a tripid? Even if you are standing in the same spot, it is hard to gauge how much you lean forward or back. That being said, I believe you on the Tamron because tests done on the 70-200mm Tamron vs. Nikon, showed the same issue.
Great Job you guys. The TAMARON is worth every cent. The lens flare and maximum focus distance issues are very small compared to what TAMARON is offering for the price.
Hey tony, about the focus breathing how can you say that nikon is at 70mm and tamron is less? maybe it is the other way around, what if tamron is at 70mm and nikon is at 75?
First of all, holy moly... so much objective evaluation crammed into 7-something minutes. wow.. THANK YOU, Tony & Chelsea! No,w quick question... Could you advise as to what the focus breathing behavior of the Tamron is as one moves farther and farther away from the minimum focusing distance? meaning, is it a constant variance from true 70mm up to a certain point and then BAM, 70mm is 70mm(on/off)? or is it gradual...diff between true 70mm and delivered 70mm gradually decreases until you get far enough away for 70mm to be 70mm?
Awesome comparison, you guys are the best photo channel with the best content. I was just thinking if the extra bucks are worthed ? But i dont think so.
Do I understand correctly that the sharpness test you did was only at 24mm? DxOMark says that at 70mm wide open Nikon is actually is significantly sharper than Tamron. Also Nikon's AF is appreciably faster than Tamron. I am surprised this did not show in your tests.
The weight and missing vr are really serious detriments to the nikon, of course. But the image quality is still way superior, imo. You need to push up the ISO when you have to go under 1/20 or so to solve that. Which isn't a problem, since the lense easily manages ISO levels up to 2000-3000 without serious quality loss.
Hi I'm planning to buy one of the lens between Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD and Tokina Fx 24-70mm f2.8 for my Nikon D610. Nikon Fx 24-70mm f2.8 VR is bit too expensive for me. I want a better image quality but VC/VR is equally important for me. I'm a casual photographer and use my camera mainly for travel photography. Currently most of my shots are landscape and some are portraits. I read the DXOMark review on these lens - tokina was rated better for it's sharpness/image quality but lacks vibration control. VC will be useful in the low light/slow shutter condition and videography. I'm not sure how good VC in this Tamron lens. Both lens has consistent wide aperture to take Bokeh and can help me to carry less lens for travel photography. Initially I wanted to buy tokina because reviews says that it has better image sharpness. But it lacks VC so I'm confused. Photography is my hobby but I've a plan to take it to another level. I need suggestions on how much impact these lenses can make on my in camera photo outcome.
Tony, Great review! If you had to choose between the Tamron 24-70 or the 70-200 lens for portraits, weddings, etc which one would you rather have? Thanks!
+ziphoticus1970 I prefer the 24-70 for portraits, for me, the 70-200 is big and heavy, not something I want to haul around all day. Also, I'm rarely that far away from my subjects to need it. If you are shooting outdoors and can't get say within 10- 20 feet of your subject go big. I also favor the big primes 85mm and 105mm for portraits. On my DX, I use a 35mm and 50 mm 1.8. most of the time. That all said, and it's just my experience and I'm certainly not a seasoned pro, my advice would be to rent both lenses and take a few days to shoot with them both, then make your decision. I rented a 70-200 for a shoot and liked it, but not enough to fork over about 2K for one!
Unfortunately durability can't be tested easily. I've repaired the tamron 28-105 and 28-75 and both have design flaws (the 28-105 is terribly build). The quick wear causes decentering issues, destroying the image quality. I don't know the 24-70 but I'd be careful. The 28-105 has plastic pins running through plastic tracks which wear out very easy. the 28-75 has metal pins in metal tracks, also wearing quick because of the friction. All sigma and nikon lenses I've repaired use plastic pins in metal tracks, only wearing out slowly and only the plastic pins need to be rotated or replaced to completely reset the wear. If you could find heavily used lenses of both then maybe that would be a nice comparison.
I just got a tamron 24-70, and was hoping it would be bit of an all around lens that I could still shoot stars with. Shoot? yes. Wide open without flaring (aka coma) on the brighter stars? No. I should have checked some images on flickr a little closer...
Almost. I tried the Tamron on a Canon 6D the coma (smudged stars in the corners) at f/2.8 was pretty disappointing as I had sold my tokina 16-28mm to help pay for the tamron. So I'm not comparing to the nikon 24-70, just commenting on the tamron. I'm back to using a samyang 14mm for stars, wanting something like a sigma 24-105 for walkaround, and waiting to see what tamron's 15-30 (I think that's the range) will be like wide open.
Focus breathing with Tamron: I think you are a little unfair to them, when Tamron has an explicit class of lenses which use their "Internal Focusing" to eliminate focus breathing. If a lense from Tamron has [IF] or Internal Focusing they should be free of focus breathing, all other lenses will should have some focus breathing (I guess).
Maybe i' missed smth, but is that correct to compare NEF for Nikkor vs JPG for Tamron? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-zu0AawE73C8.html
Great video, short and accurate. It would be awesome if you could do a review of the Tamron SP AF 28 - 75 mm F/2.8 XR Di LD as it is a great budget wide to short-tele at constant F/2.8. Also it costs less than half the price of the Tamron 24-70 but there are no good reviews out there. Thanks Guys!
Hi Tony &Chelsea, Great review! I have watched most of your videos and learnt a lot for them. Than you for revealing secrets that manufacturers don't reveal. I could not find any reviews from you on the Tamron 28-75mm F2.8. Though an old lens, it is still quite popular and a lot cheaper alternative to the 24-70mm lenses that cost dear. Could you please do a review on Tamron 28-75mm F2.8?
Which focal length was used for the VC test (billiard table test)? Just curious since at 70mm my keeper rate is not so good below 1/15 sec which translates to about 2.5 stops of VC assistance.
Comparing DxOMark detailed specs, the Tamron is impressive, smaller, lighter, and cheaper. Focus breathing aside, the Tamron seems to be less weather-sealed. On dpreview.com, user report that when shooting in moist environments, especially landscapes, the Tamron can retain moisture.I am considering a purchase one of them. VR is very impressive though.Any thoughts?
Tony, there is ONE huge problem in this review, you have not tested the sharpness on the long end. I would like to see if the tamrom is sharper than the nikon at 70mm wide open and stopped down.
What do you think about the nre Nikon 24-70 with VR ? I'd like to see this test done again with all 3 of those lenses when the Nikon VR version is released.
Tony & Chelsea, first of all, thanks for your work. I am wondering if Is it there any way to have a comparition between the old Tamron 24-70 vs the newest Nikon 24-70 VRii as well and a comparision between the old tamron 24-70 vs the newst G2? It isn't been easy for me to finding a quality stuff like this video you guys made. Thanks for sharing with us!
Tamron is good, but get the US version for the 6 years warranty. The AF mechanism on mine broke down and I had to send it for repair under warranty. I don't think I would have had that problem with the Canon L version. But with that said.. There was that story on PetaPixel of a guy that used his Tamron 24-70 in a mud race on a Nikon D600, and it handled it like a champ! petapixel.com/2015/09/03/running-a-10k-mud-obstacle-race-with-a-nikon-dslr-in-hand/
I found a usedTamron 24-70mm and have been using it on a classic Nikon D750 with great results! However, I also have an older DX camera and wondering if I will lose image quality using this lens on the DX crop sensor....your thoughts?!
Hi Tony, I think Tamron's VC (Vibration Compensation) makes better, sharper picture over Nikon. dxomarc.com seed Tamron 24-70 is 22MP and Nikon 24-70 is 21MP. only 1MP difference ... but , on your test Tamron looks like 20-30 % better over Nikon. so... its maybe only the VC.
I have the Tamron 18-270mm lens. It never leaves my D 40. I am think of a wide angle lens. And it is tough. Can you do a comparison between Tamron, Sigma or something else. I think remember you saying how sharp the Sigma was even compare to the Canon.. My wide angle would be a 10- 24 mm What do you suggest?
I'm going to purchase a D810 I will probably take more landscape pictures an pictures of the grand kids so I was wondering if the Nikon or the tamron 24-70. 2.8. VR Witch would be the best lens
tokina 28-70 atx pro II 2.8? i cant find any good review for it. i am thinking to buy tamron 24-70 vc but i want to see comparison tamron vs tokina 28-70 atx pro II 2.8 before i decide? pls help
+Tony & Chelsea Northrup if u check yt, it is immposible to find any good review but i found some sites it has good results so it is weird how there is no videos about that lens. I hope u will review it in near future. I love ur videos. Cheers - regards from croatia
Well, I have the Tokina 28-70mm f/2.8 AT-X, and I want to share an interesting observation of this very good lens. First off, it's a very sharp lens, even at corners, and when wide open too. And when using with a DX sensor body, it does not show any distortion at all. However, when using with FX bodies, it has significant barrel distortion. Not a big deal, as it can be corrected in Lightroom, and the distorted parts look sharp too, but this is an interesting observation nonetheless. By the way, my Tokina 28-70 AT-X is a very old lens, I think, and I procured mine third hand for dirt cheap, like $50. So, I can't complain. But I am not sure if it is the same lens as the Tokina 28-70 AT-X Pro II you mention.
I'm looking to get a 24-70mm lens for my D810 in the near future. Have you done a comparison between this Tamron 24-70 with VC and the newest version of the Nikon 24-70 with VR? Price difference is $1,299 for the Tamron compared to $2,400 for the Nikon.
Thanks for the video. I wonder how much focus breathing affects if you are not standing at minimum focusing distance but more like head and shoulders distance. And about sharpness at 70mm. I head Nikon got lead there.. is it true? Trying to choose a zoom for D750.(you guy's and girl ;) should try that camera out, it tops D610 pretty much everywhere in my opinion. Maybe Execpt AWB but since i shoot RAW, it doesnt matter really much. Thank you!
Hello tony. I have a nikon d800 and I need to do a 24-70, but I'm undecided between Nikon & Tamron, given your experience in photography, can you tell me if it worths to buy it, since you've tried what you advise me. With the purpose is used for marriage and so on.
Bought the Tamron for my 7D. I've now switched to Nikon D800 and got myself a Nikon 24-70mm, and I have to say Nikon is much better. Tamron is a sharp lens but not as sharp as Nikon, when it's to shooting moving subject.
May we have a comparison of the Nikon 70-200 VR II vs the Tamron 70-200 VC on the D810. I've been hearing that Nikon has the focus breathing problem on the D810. I just switched system and bought the D810 with Tamron 24-70 VC and 85 1.4G. Now time to purchase a 70-200 f/2.8.
from the video the nikon looked a little sharper at f8. the nikon looks really of at 2.8 did you guys check the af for front or back focus? how's the af on the tamron?
Hello Tony, please can you give me some urgent advice! I cannot decide between the Tamron 24-70 or the 70-200. Each are in my budget at the moment but not both. My primary focus will be studio photography of newborn babies and couple pics standing in front a white screen. My studio will have 3-4 meters of movement. I also want to shoot outdoor stuff like weddings and sports. Which one would you pick for my current situation? Thank you!
Tony- I'm seriously considering the Tamron 24-70/2.8 for my Canon 6D. I have heard some horror stories about the lens though, especially with regard to the IS. I've heard that one some cameras (5d3 for example) the IS can react badly to the shutter at around 1/100-1/160 and end up making your photo look doubled or seriously motion blurred. Have you encountered such an issue, and/or is there a way you could test that?
