I Love My Tammy! People often come to UHH questioning whether they should buy third party lenses. I've had my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 for a number of years now. It's a heavy lens so I used...

photoman022 Loc: Manchester CT USA

People often come to UHH questioning whether they should buy third party lenses. I've had my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 for a number of years now. It's a heavy lens so I used my kit lens (18-55) most of the time. I've been using my Tammy regularly for about a month. All I can say is that it is an extremely sharp lens!

I don't have the Nikon equivalent to which to compare it; I am sure that the Nikon is sharper, but I couldn't afford the Nikon at the time (and still can't afford it!).

I know one thing, the Tammy will be on the end of my camera a lot more often now!

Attached you will find an unprocessed JPEG that I took today under cloudy conditions.

(Download)

pixbyjnjphotos Loc: Apache Junction,AZ

Looks to me like your Tammy works real nice. That's a very nice photo. You could easily blow that to 16x20 or more. You have the lens that I wish I had. I have the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 and I love it. Extremely sharp images. I really would like the 28-75mm f2.8 that you have. I run out of lens at 50mm. Sometimes, it isn't quite long enough. Keep up the good work and have a GREAT DAY!

nicksr1125 Loc: Mesa, AZ

I've only had Tamron lenses since I bought my Sony Alpha 850 early last year. Like you, I have the 28-75 f/2.8. Also have the 70-200 f/2.8 & 150-600 f/5-6.3. All 3 are exceptional lenses that didn't break the bank. The Tamzilla has only been on a tripod/monopod when I take pictures of the moon. Its weight makes it a very stable handheld lens.

Jim Bob

It's refreshing to learn that there are some independent thinkers in this forum as opposed to those idiots who push only the branded lenses even when their performance is inferior to third party lenses like Tamron, Tokina and Sigma.

chaprick

Jim Bob wrote:

It's refreshing to learn that there are some independent thinkers in this forum as opposed to those idiots who push only the branded lenses even when their performance is inferior to third party lenses like Tamron, Tokina and Sigma.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Toddzzilla Loc: Modesto california

Nothing wrong with the tame on glass for sure. I have 4 tamrons 2 kit old Minolta's and my fav is a Sony / Zies lens. I have a hard time looking for other brands for my Sony a77 but may break down and try a sigma one of these days when I get rich and famous!

Jim Bob

Toddzzilla wrote:

Nothing wrong with the tame on glass for sure. I have 4 tamrons 2 kit old Minolta's and my fav is a Sony / Zies lens. I have a hard time looking for other brands for my Sony a77 but may break down and try a sigma one of these days when I get rich and famous!

Some of us are interested in superior image quality over "name brands". Some of them are interested in "name brands" over superior image quality. Pick your poison.

carl hervol Loc: jacksonville florida

I have the same lens and i did compare it with a nikon and found the tam was sharper so know I have two ,doing weddings i have two cameras set up exactly the same to use as a back up.

Bankshot Loc: Henderson, NV, USA

I have owned 4 Tammy lenses so far, 1 Sigma (8mm), and only one Nikon, but the latest, the 150-600 image quality just blows me away! I have had it for almost a year now, and it is truly amazing.
Bill

jcboy3

So did you purposely underexpose the image, or is that related to the Tammy interface with the camera?

photoman022 Loc: Manchester CT USA

jcboy3 wrote:

So did you purposely underexpose the image, or is that related to the Tammy interface with the camera?

My Nikon D3100 has a tendency to underexpose no matter what lens I use. It is not the lens.

I used my Polaris light meter for the settings: ISO 200 f/8 @ 1/125.

joe west Loc: Taylor, Michigan

photoman022 wrote:

People often come to UHH questioning whether they ... (show quote)

:thumbup:

photoman022 Loc: Manchester CT USA

jcboy3 wrote:
So did you purposely underexpose the image, or is that related to the Tammy interface with the camera?

photoman022 wrote:

My Nikon D3100 has a tendency to underexpose no matter what lens I use. It is not the lens.

I used my Polaris light meter for the settings: ISO 200 f/8 @ 1/125.

CORRECTION: I returned to the scene of the photo today at the same time under nearly identical conditions. The photo IS NOT underexposed. It is a remarkably good rendition of the scene.

kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

Jim Bob wrote:

It's refreshing to learn that there are some independent thinkers in this forum as opposed to those idiots who push only the branded lenses even when their performance is inferior to third party lenses like Tamron, Tokina and Sigma.

Ive been surprised many times to see some Nikkor and Canon lenses outscored by the Tamrons and Sigmas. Quite surprised. Optically, they may perform better, though what Ive read on these still seems to show that the Nikkor and Canon lenses still have a better build and faster focus. Maybe not in every case, but as a general rule.