Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 NIKON F-Mount

[HeldInTheMoment]

Anyone else have this lens? If so, do you experience soft images in low light?

I mean, I know soft light = soft images...but all my other lenses are tack sharp when the 24-70 seems to be off sometimes.

 

[Derrel]

Low light can mean 1) wide apertures like f/2.8 and 2)slow shutter speeds and 3)higher than normal ISO setting levels. All three of the numbered issues can contribute to "soft" images. MANY zoom lenses are NOT very good at f/2.8...they often have a noticeable improvement at f/4.

If other lenses do better in the same,m exact situations, then perhaps there is an issue with the lens? Maybe the focusing is not spot-on? Perhaps the issue could be better seen and evaluated if you post a photo complete with EXIF info, so people can look at the problem and literally 'see' what you mean.

 

[nerwin]

Can you fine tune autofocus on third party lenses?

You have the D500 which has the new automatic AF fine tune tool. I'd suggest doing that first if it works with third party lenses and see if that helps.

But like Derrel said, shooting wide open will often result in softer images.

 

[Braineack]

mine's pretty darn sharp at 2.8

 

[HeldInTheMoment]

Can you fine tune autofocus on third party lenses?

You have the D500 which has the new automatic AF fine tune tool. I'd suggest doing that first if it works with third party lenses and see if that helps.

But like Derrel said, shooting wide open will often result in softer images.

I fully understand wide open gets soft images, but even at f/4 sometimes I see softness, just not as often. Sometimes it locks focus (as per the AF point) on the subject (i.e. a person) then later in post I see it focused on the background (trees over 100 yards away).

I know the D500 has the AF Fine Tune and I tried that; though, to test it I ran it several times. Same location, same target, same light, same settings, on a tripod with remote shutter....I found the settings to change every time so I set it back to default.

 

[HeldInTheMoment]

mine's pretty darn sharp at 2.8

Mine is too, SOMETIMES...my other Tamron lenses are 100% sharp (or I know I messed up).

 

[nerwin]

mine's pretty darn sharp at 2.8

Mine is too, SOMETIMES...my other Tamron lenses are 100% sharp (or I know I messed up).

Sometimes it's sharp at 2.8? Sounds like a focus problem or you move just enough to make it look soft. I don't know man. Maybe you just got a doozy.

 

[Destin]

Can you post examples of what you mean? This would help us to trouble shoot. Also, which version of the lens do you have? The old VC model or the new G2?

 

[shadowlands]

If it makes you feel any better my "Nikon" 24-70 F2.8G is in the shop.

 

[Solarflare]

No lens has ANY idea how much light is falling through it.

Thus no, no lens ever gets soft from a certain amount of light.

What you get in low light is little light to work with, which introduces:

1. High ISO on the sensor, thus noise

2. Slow shutter speeds, thus camera shake

3. and movement blurr

4. Possibly also misfocus due to the autofocus system having issues locking on correctly

5. Maybe more ? I cant think of any other factor right now.

All of which introduce correspondingly lowered image quality.

Not a softness of the lens, though. These effects all look distictively different from lens softness.

 

[goodguy]

I own the Nikon 24-70mm 2.8G, my second shooter has the Tamron 24-70mm 2.8 VC (Original version) it is my unscientific estimate that his lens is sharper then mine by around 10%-15% across the board, I am super impressed with it.
Only flaw is that its slower to AF then my lens and while its fast enough to AF for all reasonable needs my lens is much faster then this Tamron.