I would like pros and cons on 24-70: I'm Bob I'm interested in opinions on the above Nikon verses Tamron full frame lens. I'd like to know the main application for them. Thanks...

Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum

Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰

I would like pros and cons on 24-70

Page 1 of 6 next> last>>

Mar 4, 2019 13:22:29 #

marshall_b

I'm Bob I'm interested in opinions on the above Nikon verses Tamron full frame lens.
I'd like to know the main application for them.
Thanks

Mar 4, 2019 14:08:59 #

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

Pro Photographer Matt Granger did a video on the 24-70mm f2.8 lenses. He ranked the Nikon f2.8 as #1, the Canon f2.8L as #2, the Tamron f2.8 as #3. The video was before the Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 G2 was released, which is better than the G1. Tokina's 24-70mm f2.8 has been given good reviews on this forum. I met a NFL pro photographer a few years ago. He had Canon Gear, and he said the Canon 24-70mm f2.8 L lens was necessary to do his work, along with others. I actually had it in my hands. If you are interested in the Tamron, I suggest you look into the Tamron f2.8 G2, and read the reviews on it. It will not exceed the quality of Nikon's best 24-70mm f2.8 lens. Good luck.

Mar 4, 2019 14:11:35 #

marshall_b

Thank you I will look into that

Mar 4, 2019 14:39:36 #

sandiegosteve Loc: San Diego, CA

In this focal range, I think most are pretty good. I went from an older Tamron to Nikon. In gerneral, I've found that Nikon focuses faster. Image quality is pretty consistent with Nikon. The Tamrons can be great, but there is usually some slight "except" that might be an edge use case you never see.

One big difference I've noticed is size. The Nikon is much longer. Totally happy with it, but it is a consideration for your camera bag.

Mar 5, 2019 06:03:08 #

SWADE Loc: Rochester, MI

I have owned Nikon since 1990 and only buy Nikon lenses. I recently bought the 24-70 Tamron G2 and the 15-30 Tamron G2. I found both to be just as good and in some cases better then the Nikon counter parts and at a much cheaper price. Saved $2000 buying the Tamron lenses and very happy with the results on my D850.

Mar 5, 2019 06:19:00 #

traderjohn Loc: New York City

marshall_b wrote:

I'm Bob I'm interested in opinions on the above Nikon verses Tamron full frame lens.
I'd like to know the main application for them.
Thanks

In what direction has your research led you?

Mar 5, 2019 06:23:52 #

picsman Loc: Scotland

Although I dont know your intended use, maybe think about a 24-120 lens, not the same quality as a 24-70 but gives extra reach and makes it a good walk around lens.

Mar 5, 2019 06:33:05 #

Largobob

I shoot with a D500 and D810, and am very serious about image quality. I have settled on using Nikkor "gold band" FX lenses. For me, the Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8; the Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8, and the (not gold band but excellent) Nikkor 200-500; plus the Nikkor Micro 105mm f/2.8; give me very good images.

Nikkor lenses tend to focus more quickly and accurately on Nikon cameras.

Mar 5, 2019 07:01:08 #

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Comparisons -
https://www.cameralabs.com/nikon_vs_tamron_24-70mm_comparison/
https://nikonrumors.com/2017/11/17/nikon-24-70mm-f2-8e-ed-vr-vs-tamron-sp-24-70mm-f2-8-di-vc-usd-g2-vs-sigma-24-70mm-f2-8-dg-os-hsm-art-lens-comparison.aspx/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zu0AawE73C8
https://versus.com/en/nikon-af-s-nikkor-24-70mm-f2-8e-ed-vr-vs-tamron-sp-24-70-f-2-8-di-vc-usd-g2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGEzt_nnX_0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BYkJ0HVmz4

Mar 5, 2019 08:18:29 #

khorinek

My preference is to match equipment. If you are shooting Nikon, use Nikon lenses. Personal preference.

Mar 5, 2019 08:18:37 #

tcthome Loc: NJ

mas24 wrote:

Pro Photographer Matt Granger did a video on the 2... (show quote)

I like Nikon lenses on my camera. If you go Nikon get the g version. The new Tamrong2 version is getting great reviews (actually better than the Nikon ) & is about $ 600 cheaper.

Mar 5, 2019 08:50:53 #

In-lightened Loc: Kansas City

I purchased the Tamron G2 24-70 to replace the Nikon 24-120. I chose that because the reviews seemed to give the nod to Tamron along with the savings. It will not hold it's value as Nikon will but I am very pleased. This is the workhorse when I am shooting landscapes. Good luck with your decision.

Mar 5, 2019 09:25:53 #

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

You are going to find the best quality buying a professional lens by the OEM. It does not mean the optical quality of an Independent lens manufacturer won't be there but in general the tolerances and quality of materials is better with OEM products.
If you want to save some money a used 24-70 Nikon lens, first generation will be a good deal.

Mar 5, 2019 09:50:07 #

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

I have the Sigma 24-70, f/2.8, ART lens on a Canon 80D and think it is great. The more you read of the reviews, the more it looks like Sigma, Tamron, Canon and Nikon are toss ups for overall quality. I prefer reviews to testimonials. Why? Because reviews are objective, systematic and controlled in testing. Also, the reviewers are experienced in testing gear. Testimonials are anecdotal. They are usually performed unsystematically, uncontrolled, based upon a few random shots, swayed by reputation and subjective.

That being said, the best thing to do is your own proper testing which includes comparing several brands versus to what you currently have.

Mar 5, 2019 09:56:53 #

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

Largobob wrote:

... I have settled on using Nikkor "gold band" FX lenses. For me, the Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8; the Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8, and the (not gold band but excellent) Nikkor 200-500; plus the Nikkor Micro 105mm f/2.8; give me very good images...

I have those and also the 14-24. I don't use the 14-24 much because it's bulky and doesn't fit well in my bag. Most of my really wide angle shots are of static subjects so I can just stitch several shots together. I stick with Nikon lenses because the other brands I tried didn't measure up as well.

I got the 24-70 and 70-200 about 12 years ago and they served me very well. A couple years ago they came out with new versions which (IMHO) are even better because they have the new generation of VR (which the old 24-70 didn't have). The VR on the old 70-200 could give you about a stop of improvement (you could use a slightly slower shutter speed). The new VR gives you several stops of improvement. I have gotten reasonable photos with the 200-500 hand held at 1/10 second at the 500mm end.

Of course the drawback to the newer lenses is the newer price level.

Page 1 of 6 next> last>>

If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.

Main Photography Discussion

Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections

UglyHedgehog.com - Forum