Tamron vs Nikon 24-70mm/2.8

[Eventer]

Sorry if there is threads like this but I couldn't find any exactly what I'm after...
I was in the (Somewhat dangerous) photo shop today looking into the Nikon 24-70mm/2.8. the price being $2568. The shop guy (A nikon user himself) then pointed me in the direction of of the Tamron 24-70mm/2.8. Its significantly cheaper at $1289! and has a "Vibration control" feature that Nikon doesn't have. The Nikon according to this guy is only fractionally better - I'm on the fence as part of me likes to stick to nikon but that is such a big price difference!
Anyone have experience with these lesnses?
Cheers guys!

 

[beachrat]

I think you're going to find that a lot of guys here prefer the Tamron to the Nikon depending on the body they're using.

 

[Eventer]

True, forgot about that major variable - Ill be using it on a D7000 (Hopefully soon a full frame - but thats next on the list after this lens)

 

[goodguy]

Nikon 24-70mm 2.8G is a great lens, I got it and use it most of the time.
I got it used for a very good price so for me choosing between the Tamron and the Nikon was a no brainer.
Does the Nikon worth double Tamron ?
Tough call, that will need to be your chose but I can tell you it is considered to be a very good lens.
Still most of the time when I see Nikon users with this type of glass it is always with the Nikon version and not the Tamron.

Either lens will make you happy

 

[JimMcClain]

I think some of the people who choose the Nikon over the Tamron may be Nikon purists - they will only use Nikon lenses on their Nikon cameras. Although I prefer Nikon cameras over anything else (I have experience with Canons, Sony and Olympus cameras too, but only the Nikon in the DSLR, interchangeable lens category), I will choose my peripherals, including lenses, based on their quality, not on their brand name and not on their price.

After selecting the quality of camera I wanted, first the D5300, now the D810, now I consider lenses. I want top quality and sharpness has been the first of my priorities and that is why I chose to get the Tamron 24-70mm 2.8. The Nikon may be ahead in other aspects and both may tie in one or 2 other areas, but sharpness is the thing that is the least manipulable in post-processing, compared to most of the other lens quality measurements. Most of the reviews I read indicated that the Tamron was sharper than any other in this zoom range.

I haven't used the lens as much as I'd like, but I really like it so far. No other lens I have used has been as sharp.

R'gards,

Jim

 

[Derrel]

A fellow who used to be here on TPF messaged me, asking about the Tamron 24-70 versus the Canon 24-70mm 2.8...I went to Full-size sample photos from thousands of lenses and cameras :: Pixel Peeper and looked through a BUNCH of sample images made by the Canon and the Tamron....where the Tamron loses is its aggressive bokeh, and its unfortunate "onion-ring" bokeh signature, which ruins its images for m any types of photos...

If you look, owners of the Tammy seem reluctant to post sample photos of it in obvious "bokeh ball" type situations, which are many and legion in the real world, but if you go through the samples, you'll find some photos.

One of the unfortunate issues about rating lenses PURELY on "sharpness" is that other characteristics are utterly ignored. Realllllllly high sharpness is often associated with over-corrected spherical aberration, so many lenses that are verrrry sharp have HORRIBLE, hashy background rendering. A perfect example is the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART lens: bitingly sharp at the focused-upon distance, but very hashy,nervous, almost-aggressive background rendering that basically, ruins the lens for what it would be best at: outdoor portraiture and landscapes...

Again...test chart sharpness on a flat-plane test target is one easy statiscally simple measure to arrive at, but with a 24-70, you are putting ALL YOUR EGGS into one basket....your 24,28,35,45,50,55,58,60,and 70 lens lengths are ALL in one tube...you will likely NOT use separate 24,28,35,or 50mm primes, so FOUR critical lengths will be handled by one, single lens.

If you want to handle everything from wide to short telephoto, and rate test chart sharpness as the most-critical criterion, then the Tamron wins based on price. My friend who looked at the Tamron versus the Canon 24-70 comparisons went for the Canon, because when you see how the Tamron actually handles back-lighted nature shots, you'll understand what was compromised. The aspherical element design compromises many bokeh shots...if you want a wide to short tele lens that can HANDLE backlighted foliage, lights, etc..a Canon user has to fork out another $1,000. Please note, I have made NO comments about the Nikkor 24-70mm in this post...I compared the Canon vs the Tamron! At one, specific site, PixelPeepers.com, based on samples from all over the world.

 

[Sventek]

I have the Nikon version on my D800E. I have also tried a friend's Tamron 24-70 f2.8. Other than some minor vignetting, the Tamron had a better IQ than the Nikon. However, I didn't test things like bokeh from bright lights at night etc., which is one area where there may be an important difference. FWIW, I do a lot of sports shooting at night, and my local store was kind enough to let me borrow the Nikon and Tamron versions of the 70-200 f2.8 for one evening. I now own the Tamron version. Again, the only difference is the vignetting, and I was very happy with the bokeh. The vignetting (and just about everything else) is taken care of in my batch processing in DxO Optics Pro, and Piccure+ seems to overcome every lens aberration issue and, occasionally, some movement.

 

[Eventer]

Thanks guys! you are all such a fountain of knowledge!
I'll have a play on those review sites such as pixel peeper and compare the Nikon to the Tamron. Cause I'm really not sure the Nikon is worth that much more! So good to hear all your opinions though

 

[Braineack]

Onion is easy to correct.

 

[JimMcClain]

Onion is easy to correct.

How?

 

[goodguy]

Onion is easy to correct.

How?

Easy, you add tomatoes, cucumbers and some lettuce and make a wonderful hearty salad

 

[Braineack]

Either Field Blur and/or Dust and Scratches it in PS. Or spot brush in LR and turn sharpness/clarity to -100.

And looks to me like the Canon version of this lens exhibits the same characteristics:
24-70 II Onion Ring Bokeh

 

[JimMcClain]

Thanks, Braineak, that's helpful.

 

[astroNikon]

Oh wow, That is interesting Onion Ring bokeh.
At least it's nothing like a reflex lens.

 

[Braineack]

Thanks, Braineak, that's helpful.

I have a few shots that exhibit the onion rings in my bokeh balls. I'll document how easy it would be to remove them. I've never tried because I honestly don't care.