Carl D Loc: Albemarle, NC.

Why would you want a zoom for landscapes? A nice prime would be better IMHO. Somewhere in the 24-35mm range.

Lloydpow

thank you for your advice, that is a very good question and I will check what's available. the only thing that would be different is that while on vacation, it might require me too have something available to take pictures close-up

Papa j Loc: Cary NC

I have the Tamron and love it, I also have a Nikon 35-70 2.8 used from B&H it is as good and cheaper

Joe

Lloydpow

Thank you for this idea :) really appreciate

wolfman

Why not a zoom for landscapes? You can't always zoom with your feet. I use the Nikkor 16-35 f/4, and get excellent results.

Bill Emmett Loc: Bow, New Hampshire

I shoot Canon, but I shoot the Tamron SP 24-70. It is a large, and heavy lens. As far as photo quality, it is a great lens.

B

jackm1943 Loc: Omaha, Nebraska

I'm very happy with mine. I use on a Canon 6D full frame. It's very sharp and gives the user the change to crop in camera.

photoman022 Loc: Manchester CT USA

Like others, I, too, have the Tammy and it takes a crisp, sharp photo. It's my goto lens for portraiture.

Al Bruton

It is a great lens and well worth the cost

Lloydpow

Thanks to all for the comments :) Seems like most everyone likes .
I am planning on using one a my carry around lens, but being able to shoot wide angel's such as church interiors without flash, and some landscape views, but also have normal width for people pictures and walk around pics

Lloydpow

many times where I live i'm backed up into the woods shooting the river, not much more room for backing up :) but that is a great idea

jimmya Loc: Phoenix

My only comment is that I bought a Tamron 18-200 for my Canon. The lens wouldn't focus and wouldn't expose properly so I never bought another Tamron. I understand that lots of us here swear by Tamron and I'm glad they're having good luck with brand. I was one of those who didn't so now I buy only Canon lenses.

Slade

I was using the L series Canon 24-105mm f/4.0 on my 6d camera and loved it. Went to my grand daughters wedding and the photographer was using the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 on a Canon 6d and commented it was a great lens and less costly than the Canon versions. I take a lot of shots indoors in low light situations and can't use a flash so I thought this might be a better choice for me.

After a lot of reading and research I decided to buy a new Tamron 24-70 and sell my Canon 24-105. The lens arrived and I set up my tripod and took a lot of shots not moving the tripod while switching from the Tamron to Canon lens using the same settings on both. I then went indoors to get some low light shots. What I found is that if I couldn't get a focus with the Canon, the Tamron was also not able to obtain a focus. No advantage to the Tamron as my Canon performed as well in low light situations.

After downloading and comparing the shots taken, it was very easy to see that the Canon was much sharper than the Tamron. Specs and lab tests are great, but to me what is more important is how the equipment really performs in the real world. Another thing I noticed, outdoor shots with the Canon were also brighter while the Tamron required photoshopping to lighten and see the same detail. The Tamron arrived on Monday and Tuesday evening was on ebay to be sold.

Lloydpow

Slade
thanks for the comments, I have heard others make the same comments :) My biggest problem is that I don't see any reason for me to spend $2,0000.00 on a Nikon to take pictures when we travel 5 or 6 times a year, and the photos are just foe me. never try to print, sell , or post to contests :) So that is my program., what do I do
go fancy for big bucks or spend smaller bucks and get 75 to 80% picture quality

Hal81 Loc: Bucks County, Pa.

I cant help you with that one but I do have one of Tamron lens and they do make a fine lens for the money. Im very happy with mine.