Nikon vs Tamron

ORourkeK · Feb 5, 2019

I want to upgrade my Nikon 24-70 2.8 ED to another 24-70 with VR. I will also be picking up the Nikon 105 mm 1.4 or the Nikon 70-200 ED VR 2. My question is, have any of you compared the Nikon duo vs Tamron's G2's? Is the few thousand bucks worth it to go with the Nikon lenses? I am assuming the biggest difference is the focusing system in low light. I just want to make sure I am not picking up the first party lenses over the third party just because of the name.

Solarflare · Feb 12, 2019

Thats an almost tragic story.

Nikon had the reference lens for wide angle, their AF-S 14-24mm f2.8, for ages. It was so good, Canon users adapted it to their cameras. Which is possible with Nikon on Canon, but not the other way around.

At the same time Nikon couldnt compete with Canons telephoto offers.

First Tamron came out with the 15-30mm f2.8 VC and dethroned Nikon as the best wide angle lens. Granted, its not a huge difference, but the Tamron is even cheaper, too, and offers image stabilization.

Then Nikon came out with their amazing but expensive AF-S 70-200mm f2.8 E FL VR. Finally they had something as good as the Canon offer. But only months later Tamron released their 70-200mm f2.8 VC "G2". They had designed that lens to compete with the Canon offer. It was as good as Nikons lens in both optics and autofocus, but for less than half the official price.

I'd have to add that Tamron even recently released a slightly improved G2 version of the 15-30mm f2.8 VC.

Fortunately for Canon and Nikon many people indeed still go for the first party lenses, just because of the name. In case of the AF-S 14-24mm f2.8 theres even a good reason to, because the Tamron 15-30mm f2.8 is actually more of a 16-30mm f2.8.

I would like to add that you should treat all these lenses especially carefully. The most robust lenses you can buy are Zeiss/Voigtländer manual focus lenses. The most fragile lenses are these highly complex high performance zooms that contain a very high amount of fine mechanics to make them work. Statistically these are the lenses most often needing repair, so dont mistreat them.

Braineack · Feb 12, 2019

If I had the means, I would replace my Tamron 24-70 and 70-200 for Nikon counterparts.

jaomul · Feb 12, 2019

Braineack said:
If I had the means, I would replace my Tamron 24-70 and 70-200 for Nikon counterparts.

Do you have the G2 versions

Braineack · Feb 12, 2019

no, the G1.

When I bought them, they were measuring sharper than the Nikons at a much lower price -- and at the time that meant a lot to me. I really have no qualms about them [they are performers], but I simply prefer the rendering characteristics of the Nikon glass better.

greybeard · Feb 12, 2019

Braineack said:
no, the G1.

When I bought them, they were measuring sharper than the Nikons at a much lower price -- and at the time that meant a lot to me. I really have no qualms about them [they are performers], but I simply prefer the rendering characteristics of the Nikon glass better.

That is the sticking point I have with 3rd party vs OEM. They just look different than the Nikon equivalent. To me, Nikon lenses look the same across the board.

Strodav · Feb 12, 2019

Braineack said:
no, the G1.

When I bought them, they were measuring sharper than the Nikons at a much lower price -- and at the time that meant a lot to me. I really have no qualms about them [they are performers], but I simply prefer the rendering characteristics of the Nikon glass better.

Help me understand. What are "rendering characteristics" and is that covered in typical reviews?

Braineack · Feb 12, 2019

The Nikon is a little more warm, where the Tamron's images will look blue.

The Nikon has better in-to-out of focus transitions, and I think the bokeh overall is better.

things like that.

Strodav · Feb 13, 2019

This table came from DxOMark.com and might help in your decision process. Personally, I went with the Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 G2. I initially bought it for a D800 where it performed flawlessly and it is the lens I leave on my new D850. I was so pleased with the performance of that lens I also picked up a Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 G2. I have never had an AF focus problem with either lens. I find the bokeh pleasing. I have not noticed any color cast, but that kind of thing is easily adjusted in PP.

Braineack · Feb 13, 2019

It's not bad at all, dont get me wrong, but subjectively all things being equal I would prefer the Nikons image over the Tamrons.

But these are like tiny little things most people wouldn't notice that add up to me.

for example, one thing that bothers me with my Tamron 70-200 is foreground blur. The image has this dual-exposure/motion-blur look to it when it transitions OOF. Instead of just getting soft and mushing out, the way it renders is a little distracting to me. I don't really notice this with Nikon glass -- but I'd really have to do some direct comparison shots.

The transition to OOF behind the subject looks fine to me.

It's really nit picky, but glass has character, and I prefer the Nikon glass in a few regards. I LOVE my 58mm, yet it's the softest lens I own, much softer than the 50mm 1.8G/1.4G, but it renders images in such a lovely way.