|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on June 17, 2017 Pros: Good sharpness up to 65mm (ta), lightness, versatility, brightness, portability, price Cons: 65mm to TA loses in clarity, not stabilized. Opinion: After reading many opinions I decide to risk and buy it. I mount it on my eos 6d and i hope i will not encounter such surprises: front or back focus? Slow and inaccurate in low light, noisy focus. Nothing about this. I watch, look at the files, control them on the pc and get a good breath of relief. Well sharpened sharp files at 28 mm f2.8 have a good sharpness up to 65mm and then softens a lot. As soon as the diaphragm closes, the sharpness is really great. Very light but with good solidarity it's a good thing for anyone traveling and does not like bulky weights. With the central focus point of the 6d hooks up the subject well and quickly even in low light, To conclude I would say that all in all for the price quality is definitely promoted.rn. |
 | sent on March 27, 2017 Pros: Price, sharpness, image quality, 2.8 fixed Cons: Maf, building, limping, suffers flare. Opinion: Bought used months ago for a trip, after a fairly intense use, I have to be very satisfied with this lens, especially since it has paid less than 200 euros. Very versatile on FF, it gives great shots and the aperture to 2.8 (widely usable) does not feel the lack of stabilization. It's light and does not bother too much, even when it's full days. Unfortunately, sometimes the mafia is a bit tiring, especially in low light conditions, construction is very plastic, especially the hood that seems to have to break only by mounting it, and the Lock of the focal ring, which I always keep open for fear of breaking it. Also, you have to be very careful about the flare. Finally, for my needs and considering the price, I can not recommend it especially to who, like me, is not a professional and does not feel it deal with much more substantial expenses for a 24 70 f / 2.8. |
 | sent on February 25, 2017 Pros: image quality, fully usable shots already in TA, light weight, the used price. Cons: Autofocus slow, too slow, building a more plasticky. Opinion: I bought a couple of months ago and I use Nikon D800.rnNon I complain because cheap and the yield is much, il.problema is that the autofocus is slow, uncertain in low light conditions, it is practically the only ha.rnAddirittura achilles heel that is slower than the Sigma 28-70 2.8 ex dg although la.qualitá is waaay more than sigma.rnSe you use it to book and click premarital at home or outdoors (picture then built) is fine. rnLo not recommend it for baptisms / weddings where the readiness of an autofocus to catch the moment (especially in the church) is of obbligornrn |
 | sent on November 02, 2016 Pros: lightweight, 2.8 Fixed and usable Cons: material, with canon sometimes contact problems Opinion: I took this lens the wake of DxO excellent data on the coupling that would have done with my canon 5D mkII. I must say that I am satisfied and I'll explain why: rn- if I spend so little of course the lens is to fight, so I would not expect plastics and eccellentirn- equipment I want to surrender, and this is clear when you need it, with a great bokeh, luminosissimorn- I wish I could take back to the mountains or the woods, so it must be lightweight, and this èrnUnico very little forgivable flaw is that sometimes tells me that the contacts do not or are dirty, this is unacceptable since I have a 5D and not a camera nicchia.rnIl cmq result is much higher than the canon 24-105 of kit that I had before. |
| sent on May 17, 2016 Pros: Price, light weight, 2.8 fixed, sharpness Cons: Not stabilized, plasticky material, lens hood unwatchable Opinion: This goal has been a pleasant surprise! Hard to find a fixed 2.8 of this optical quality at this price. Of course, the materials are not at the top, but not by a sense of fragility, if not for some components. Also the fact that the lens is light for me is a positive factor. A day with 24-70 2.8 Canon (I have had the opportunity to try to be a friend) or worse with the equivalent (bad) Sigma me very tired because the weight. Too bad this little gem does not reach 24mm, otherwise it would have been almost perfect (obviously in relation to the price). The focus is not bad, not too noisy although not ultrasonic. Obviously we do not expect the speed and precision of Canon L. What is amazing is the sharpness, good even at 2.8 over the entire focal length. The best gives him up to f4. I compared the sharpness of this lens with that of the Canon (L!) 24-105 f4 F4 and the Tamron is slightly better result. It suffers less flare. Therevignetting buy at 2.8 but it is not intrusive (I use it on FF). The "" lock button which serves to lock the zoom is fragile to the touch and the sense of breaking down at any moment. Great blurred that offers: soft and pleasant. Excellent also the minimum focusing distance. There is hope even to approach such a subject, but the Tamron still focuses! Too bad the Tamron has fallen into banal details like the hood, made of "plasticaccia" light that seems fragile. Also awkward to assemble and disassemble. But it certainly is not the hood that makes the quality of the lens. Certainly also has other defects: the color rendering is not exciting, it is not stabilized nor tropical conditions. But at this price you can not expect certain things! In conclusion, I highly recommend this little gem. ;) |
  | sent on March 30, 2016 Pros: nondescript Cons: nondescript Opinion: I purchased the lens last year on it right away (used) by a Sicilian gentleman who then would not feel right to cancel the sale. The lens is the result of incompatible canon: 5d2, 6d, 30d, 40d, that is grafted perfectly but by mistake and it clicks (dry contacts). It works instead of 600d and 1000d. Brought in assistance through RCE (kind and helpful) I was made an estimate of more than 200 Euros, so I decided to let it go greet gandy |
 | sent on March 29, 2016 Pros: sharpness, construction, price Cons: not VC, missing as the basis 24mm, f nonreactive Opinion: I took pictures with the Canon 24-70 2.8 first series and with the 24-105 f4 and the same with Tamron NOT BELIEVE the sharpness of tamron than two Canon zoom scale of 1 to 10 7 points for canon 8 points for Tamron did not think the comparison then why spend double or triple if less than 500 € you have the quality !!! MEDITATE |
 | sent on November 04, 2015 Pros: Good quality / price ratio, 2.8 constant Cons: Resolution color, ultrasonic AF and slow Opinion: Do everything good, used on FF offers a great angle of 28 while 75 is not bad for portraits almost fully open, obvious that if you are working at the limits of the excursion the lens brings out their flaws in terms of definition , sharpness, chromatic aberrations and vignetting at minimal expense pa.rnInsomma maximum yield. |
 | sent on January 21, 2015 Pros: Lightweight Compact Price Sharpness over f3.5 Lens hood included Cons: sharpness at RT. no VC. AF is not always fast Opinion: I chose this perspective because I was looking for a range of focal lengths that I could satisfy more than 50mm, f2.8, and it was especially economico.rnSoddisfatto? Surely! Defects? Certainly! RnNon think it can be compared to 24 70VC but for amateurs Sunday without huge claims offers value QP.rnLa its sharpness is good from f3.5 up, reaches the maximum at f9 f13, besides enters diffraction. At f2.8 is very soft and the focal length of 75 loses a bit 'of dettaglio.rnL'AF although not USM is acceptable (not recommended for use in sports, action shots or where need a fast AF) and only in rare occasions was wrong but I could give even blame the SLR. Missing the stabilizer, I do not find a big problem but in some cases would really comfortable. rnCompatto and light with a lens hood and modest (still a hood / barrel / shots / etc. is!) you bring it around without major ingombri.rnPersonalmente his strong point is the rapp QP. With just over 300E takes home a zoom discreet and many more performinggoals kit similar price. |
 | sent on September 25, 2014 Pros: price, constant 2.8 aperture, light weight. Cons: focal length on aps-c, non-ultrasonic motor, no vibration reduction Opinion: Using a couple of years on D90, bought usato.rné my favorite handyman, allows you to switch from a normal (42mm equivalent) with a good telephoto (112mm) zoom .rnSe the comparison with other more professional FF is noted that the construction is cheap, it lacks the VR, there are treatments to nanocrystals, etc ... but is available at a great price, and weighs just 2.8 allows you to work without too much morbidezza.rnSu APSC is discovered on the wide side, which necessarily leads to a second purchase, at least for a fisso.rnResa chromatic distortions and kept in the backlight are not exciting, but more than honest, a couple of Edding in pp and you get good file. |
 | sent on April 21, 2014 Pros: sharpness, quality / price, brightness, "macro" Cons: chromatic aberrations, the color resolution with too much light Opinion: Glass fantastic. I use this lens on APSC and I find the zoom range much sense. The sharpness from f4 up is fantastic, lose a little below 'but if you do not have high demands is still usable, or for example in the portraits can also be enjoyable. The bokeh is very pleasant, although not always perfectly round. The color rendering is good but not fantastic, sometimes saturated a bit 'too much and especially with lights very strong. Unfortunately, sometimes we lose a little 'chromatic aberration ... but this is easily resolved in post production ;) rnConsiderando that the focus is always 28cm minimum to 75mm allows for interesting details, it is certainly not a true macro, but is still very utile.rnrnTirando sums: if you are looking for a goal-rounder, with a low price, this is the right goal! Sure it's not perfect, but if you're looking for a decent zoom, bright, crisp and without breaking your wallet, this Tamron I can not recommend it highly enough :) |
 | sent on April 20, 2014 Pros: value / prezzo.rnNitido, Af precise, bright, AC and PF contained. Cons: colors, Af slow and noisy, vignetting at RT. Opinion: I have used this lens on a Canon 5D old and has been a faithful companion for a year, using it only for shooting in b / w: color rendition I've never digested and I sold it for this motivo.rnHa a system autofocus very slow and noisy, but accurate. In poor lighting makes it hard to connect with, better to use the maf manual. With the right light gives great shots. Pleasing bokeh. Sharp in the center (also in f2, 8), but the best of it expresses f4, f5, 6 reaching good results at the edges and perfect in the middle. AC and PF contained, cartoon TA but often it's nice :) rnLo advice to those who have a tight budget and in need of versatility and brightness ... Quality / price unbeatable. VOTE 8. |
| sent on April 18, 2014 Pros: Value for money, f2.8 at all focal lengths. Cons: Hood, AF is not very precise and slow in low light Opinion: This lens was my first purchase a few months ago, I reviewed this now because later I bought another lens, and this helped me to understand the flaws and merits of this 28-75.rnHo took this lens to start learning and to have the opportunity to take some photos in every situation, I was fine with the focal length from 75mm to 50 compared to 17 gave me the advantage of being able to zoom in more and was very comfortable in many situations, as opposed to the focal 28mm is not as many opportunities for landscape photos and group shots in fact my second lens was necessarily a wide angle. The AF is not bad after all with good light even if inaccurate, the problems increase with poor light, but all things considered usable. It also has vignetting of which you'll find even if you are a beginner and you will begin to notice only later, however, nothing to worry about, in fact, the photos are more than acceptable even without post-production. A f2.8 is sicuramenyou a little soft, to the best of around 5.6 where f pictures for "landscape" can be compared to professional lenses. The situation is different if you have to do close-ups, in this case the fact that it is not a professional lens is more noticeable because the precise autofocus will not allow you to focus your eyes perfectly and then you'll have a hard excellent sharpness on the especially at f 2.8. The blur is nice and it is a great lens to be able to do the first experiments. The worst thing about this lens is the lens hood really embarrassing that I would call "plasticaccia creaking", it is also not easy to put on the lens and that each time you will lose a bit of time, once mounted his duty when he plays (so sti c i ...). Holding it in your hand feels that the building is far from excellent and also the quality of the plastic is not the best. The colors are not very saturated, all the better if you close 1-2 stop, however, qT his can improve it in post production. This Tamron has the great advantage of being lightweight and can be used on all occasions even though he did not excel in anything, give you the ability to always (or almost) good photos without a lot of weight and size. I conclude by saying that I recommend this lens to anyone who wants to learn and experience because of the interesting opportunity, in my opinion it does not compare to professional lens but still a good goal. Today I feel the need for something a little better even if they are convinced that they are still squeezed this lens, the step forward is really expensive to have the improvements that probably are not worth the price gap especially if you do not take pictures for work. Ps I use this lens on a 7D |
user5755  | sent on February 26, 2014 Pros: relatively light, bright, blur and sharpness appreciable ultimately good value for money, Cons: without stabilization, plasticky to the touch and implementation, system af not fast Opinion: I bought this lens for a few weeks, I was surprised by the excellent performance in relation to cost. For aesthetic similarity I could say that it's Tammy 17-50 f 2.8 updated for FF, also similar to the performance and behavior. Manifested on FF to a maximum focal visible vignetting on the corners, I think the sound of FA acceptable as well as the speed of focus. Appreciable macro function that actually allows you to focus when focus up close, I also believe that the softness in maximum aperture may be also nice portraiture. The barrel looks plasticky to the touch and implementation, but still managed to convey a sense of well done. Considering the competitive price (I paid € 180 in Germany as an object braids new exhibits) I think it is excellent and I recommend it to those who do not want gutted. |
 | sent on December 31, 2013 Pros: Good light blurred, minimum distance of excellent focus, AF, however, fast, excellent value for money. Cons: Noisy AF, build quality improved but given the cost goes well Opinion: Used for about 5000 shots on Canon 5DII I can only say that it is one of the best goals in the economy segment weight that makes it easier for excursions without sacrificing an f2.8 aperture, already if it seems soft to this opening does not matter as however, at f2.8 you will see a very bright image in the viewfinder that will help you a lot in composizione.rnVignettatura included: being, however, the minimum focal length 28 we could expect nothing more but to Flare male.rnResistenza good, I would say the best so noble canon 24 105.rnA part-whole, I found this lens a great traveling companion, at this price you just have to be proud of possederlo.rnConsiglio strongly diaphragm use f7, 1 -8 to get the best results easily comparable to the performance of lenses high range. |
user24371 | sent on November 23, 2013 Pros: price-good all-rounder at a reduced size Cons: construction plasticky-af unreliable with scarsca-brightness does not excel on FF Opinion: I had mounted on a Nikon d300s and as the focus was a little push on the DX was more than excellent sharpness at f8 for landscape and portrait made well in 2.8 even though it was a bit soft. Quite another to say as soon as you mount it on FF unusable at room temperature and becomes distinct from f10 onwards, however, where you can see clearly the difference between the center and edges, Repurchased for canon 5d with 12 MP, you can use it over the performance of ' lens you see the rest for what it costs you can not expect to meglio.Direi a great all-rounder for those who expect to monetize economic for a lens seria.rnCostruzione plasticky and after a while you use it the ring starts to harden. |
 | sent on November 06, 2013 Pros: Sharp, focal range on FF, bright and "light," made at the edges Cons: TA soft, non-usm, maf inaccurate. Opinion: I'm testing a few days, for the price it is really nice, 2.8 a hair soft, but not bad, for the use that I do not use it perpetually between f5.6 and f13 is gorgeous, very sharp edges and overall yield very buona.rnCostruzione a little plasticky, but overall it is not a problem, then saw the price! |
 | sent on September 13, 2013 Pros: Sharpness - Lightweight - Price - Brightness Cons: Construction - Focus Opinion: I have comparison shots with the Canon 70-200 f4 L lent, the quality of the images was very similar, this would be enough to say that x has a great glass! A 2.8 is a bit 'soft but perhaps already at 3.5 is absurd, great sharpness, the blade can do the strett x, xi and blurred portraits, also has good quality close-up. His problems are unfortunately the building, which is a bit plasticky, I'm afraid x the sand, even if until now he has not happened, and the focus, not absolutely precise! CONCLUSION rnih but against the two lists do not give a damn, they are forced choices x keep down the price and weight, and it sn happy, my photographic style is fairly static, I wanted sharpness el've had it!! To be taken into consideration if you have a small budget :) |
user26803 | sent on June 25, 2013 Pros: bright, great value for money, sharpness and blur Cons: construction plasticky, autofocus lens hood unstable and inaccurate and slow Opinion: I use it on a Canon 5D for the past quite some time. is a great objective value for money I must say. it is true a little too soft at 2.8 but using it from f / 4 to f/5.6 at its best if it becomes a knife in my opinion! The focus must say the truth, is not the best. with light holds up well even if a little slow in the dark Well guys, take some time to calm and focus properly! In conclusion cm ² is a perspective that I recommend XKE has an incredible value for money and could replace the famed 24-70 f/2.8 for the less demanding and for those who do not have a huge budget! |
 | sent on March 26, 2013 Pros: Image quality, macro, brightness, price Cons: Feeling a little plasticky, focus a little strange on aps-c Opinion: Some critics focus slow, but I've never seen as a problem. Beautiful blurred, excellent image quality, excellent color rendering, bright and can also be used as a macro (ok is not 1:1 but is comfortable in many situations). Sold only uncomfortable because of aps-c but the pass to the FF riprenderei the fly. |
 | sent on December 05, 2012 Pros: Good sharpness, brightness and price Cons: Autofocus noisy Opinion: A great lens especially for the value for money. APSC of 28 mm are long, but the range of focal lengths is great for street, wide open allows you to get great portraits even though it is a little soft. The color rendition in my opinion is good and the internal focusing facilitates the use of polarizers. Lacks the full time manual focus and zoom tends to themselves when hung on the neck if you do not get stuck with the lever. Overall a good lens that makes her figure even on FF. |
 | sent on November 09, 2012 Pros: bright, good blurred the minimum distance of focus, light handy, good quality and price. Cons: slightly soft at f/2.8 Opinion: I took this as the first Tamron lens for my Nikon D7000 Body at first I was a little puzzled not finding opinions and discussions where there was talk of this lens then when I decided to take it I realized its potential you can not help it not recommended for both quality and price bargain luminoso. crystal clear and none to envy targets Nikon. |
 | sent on October 10, 2012 Pros: brightness - quality / price ratio - Cons: saw the price you can only criticize the hood too plasticky, lack full time manual focus Opinion: paid 350 euro in physical store, I took away a lot of satisfaction, soft at the edges at full aperture becomes a blade closing of a single stop, as if to the best of f8, construction, and strong enough, if used on APS senori -C need to bundle it with a good wide angle, unfortunately in backlit conditions the resistance to flare is not a reference, excellent yield cromaticarnrnEDIT: switching to full size and the yield improved significantly |
 | sent on December 17, 2011 Pros: Value for money, color rendering, minimal distance of focus, clear if closed at least one stop Cons: Too soft to 2.8 hood very plasticky. Opinion: It 'a lens, good value for money, clear closed if at least one stop: a 2.8 is too soft, but it definitely improves already f.4 to become really very good from 5.6 onwards. Beautiful color rendering, similar to the 24-70: Tamron tends to saturate less the image. The AF on my 5D II works well: of course not as reactive as a USM, but it is quite accurate and I have not found it ok. Thanks to its magnification and if you have special demands, can partially compensate for the absence of a Macro. Dignified the construction, even if the hood is too plasticky. In short: if you do not pretend sharpness at 2.8, is a good alternative to the Canon 24-70 especially considering it costs only a fraction (1/3) of the same. |
 | sent on October 25, 2011 Pros: bright, minimum focusing distance, price, quality lens Cons: unusable wide open, system focus embarrassing to say the least, lack of adjustment to manual focus when in autofocus Opinion: It 'a lens that has a quality / price ratio very good, I bought it for 2.8 hours but I must say that TA is so soft that the pillow where I sleep in comparison is made of marble! However, some closing stop the lens becomes a real blade, made amends abundantly its softness and its motor (ino-ino eh!) Focus: slow, noisy and inaccurate (especially in the absence of a good deal of light). It's not really macros, but has a minimum distance that you can still make decent enlargements. Summing up I can recommend it, as long as there are weapons of patience ... My vote is seven |
 | sent on October 03, 2011 Pros: Price, quality of the blur, sharpen Cons: Slow and noisy AF, build quality is not excellent Opinion: On APS-C is a bit 'long when used as primary optics when used with a 10-20/22 can be part of a camera kit. THE build quality is not up to canon, even the series USM, plasticky and games, but returns good images, copy in my possession at the minimum focus is sharper than a canon 24-70 I had, but resists slightly flare, and many times moving shots loses focus. On a FF (21mpx) the use as optical all-around, with excellent results |
 | sent on September 29, 2011 Pros: bright, good value for money Cons: af slow, long lens for APSC, too soft to 2.8 Opinion: A good lens that I bought second-hand. It amuses me because it is very light making it possible to reduce the depth of field, the focal length is not optimal for the APSC (on canon equivalent to a 45-120). At full aperture is a bit 'too soft but just close a stop sign and gives good details. The focus is internal, so as not to rotate the front lens and the construction looks solid. Unfortunately, the autofocus is slow and does not have full time manual focus. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
