Nikon 24-70 2.8 compared to the Tamron 28-75 2.8

[dearlybeloved]

I;m interested in hearing what you guys and gals think of these two lenses compared to each other. I just purchased the Nikon D800e and I currently use the Tamron 28-75 and although I think it's a nice lens and very sharp, I still feel like I could get even more consistently sharper photos with the Nikon 24-70. Sharpness is a priority to me (hence the d800e) and I'm curious to know whether any of you have or have used both lenses enough to help me understand the benefits of having one or the other. I have done a little research and most of it is dated, but I still wanted to ask you guys and get some solid opinions.

Derrel, I know you've got to have something for, so please chime in.

Thanks in advance!

 

[Ballistics]

If sharpness is a priority, then the Nikon is your only option.

 

[Derrel]

DxOMark has tested both of those lenses on high-resolution Nikon bodies. The Tamron is one of the best-performing third-party zooms in that focal length range, and has been for going on the better part of a decade. The Tamron was VERY well-received: Pentax licensed it for their own line; Minolta licensed it for their own line; Sony re-upped the license for their own line. Ultimately though, the Nikkor is better than the other offerings in F-mount. I saw a used one today for $1,200 asking price.

DxOMark - Tamron SP AF 28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical [IF] Nikon

DxOMark - Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

THE NEW SIGMA 24-70 is also very high-performing. Check out DxOMark's list of lenses tested exclusively on the D800.

 

[dearlybeloved]

Thanks guys! If you can get me a link to that used 24-70 I would actually be interested in purchasing it.