Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 VC By Nasim Mansurov 87 CommentsLast Updated On July 3, 2020«1. Overview and Specifications2. Optical Features3. Lens Comparisons4. Summary5. More Image Samples6. Reader Comments»Table of ContentsOverview and SpecificationsOptical FeaturesLens ComparisonsSummaryMore Image SamplesReader Comments
I bought the G2 and absolutely loved it the brief time I used it. (It had a bad squeak during AF, so it went back.) But the sample photos in this article look so so so bad. They’re so washed out! Are all these people albinos? I found several other sites with other sample photos, but if this was the only site I was going off of I would’ve steered clear of this lens.
How’about doing a review of the G2 lens !?
I just purchased the new G2 version of this lens. Interestingly I have an old 24mm f2.8D nikkor and a 35-70 2.8 Nikkor. Both the Nikkors perform better than the Tamron in microcontrast and sharpness. Not good. I also like the rendering on the old Nikkors. They are actually sharper in the corners than the 24-70. The thing that really gets me is the Tamron is supposed to have fantastic corner sharpness at 24mm. The only thing is that you have to switch lenses to go to 24mm with these old nikkors. You can carry the 24 in your pocket. All I have to say is wow, this 24mm 2.8d is a great performer. An eye-opener to say the least. The Tammy is going back to the shop. Although, I have to say that the 15-30 is really pretty good.
I am very pleased with my Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC usd for Nikon lens. I read all sorts of reviews on the lens many of which compared it very favorably with the Nikon and Canon counterparts. I have used the Nikon 24-70 f2.8 as a rental on occasion however if I wished to purchase the VR version I would have had to spend $1300 plus tax more. After running the Tamron through its paces after my purchase and now having had the lens for a year of shooting I can honestly say you would really have to have deep pockets to purchase the Nikon or Canon 24-70mm. This lens performs so close and I mean so very close to the Nikon that I can see no reason to spend the additional money. I have compared my photos taken with the Nikon to the Tamron and can honestly not tell a difference. The build quality of the Nikon maybe slightly more robust but I’m not sure with even that statement as I haven’t dropped, banged or tried to do serious damage to either so both may be tough as nails. The VC or VR (lens shake stabilization) is very good on both but I can say that the Tamron VC is quieter and instantaneous where I could notice the Nikon VR took a fraction of a second to grab.
I am a Nikon shooter and have had and have a variety of Nikkor lenses and I can say that Nikkor lenses are top rate for sure. This is my first Tamron and for the price blows me away. It is sharp, very sharp the equal to the Nikkor. The focus seems very, very close to the Nikkor but I think that the Nikkor is a hair quicker. Both get focus every time even in low light. Some complain that the zoom control turns the wrong way (Canon shooters) but it is bang on for us Nikon people. The zoom was stiff when I first got the lens but either has gotten better or I adapted. The focus ring is thin but buttery smooth, precise and very sure for manual focus control.
I was somewhat unsure in purchasing the Tamron due to many conflicting reports of poor copies of the lens and some saying it didn’t measure up to the Canon or Nikon. I am so glad I bought the Tamron as either I got an excellent copy or Tamron has upped it’s game. I can live with the distortion and vignetting as the Nikon was similar so it is the nature of the beast and easily corrected in post. This lens feels like a high quality product and I wouldn’t say that if it wasn’t true. I like the quality of my Nikon DSLR and Nikkor lenses and this just feels the same. High quality.
The Tamron is water resistant with a rear lens mount rubber ring and weather sealing at other critical areas however I have yet to use this lens in the rain but it is nice to know that it is up to the task. The out of focus areas or bokeh seems to be quite good to me. I haven’t noticed the onion effect I have read often about and I am pleased with the lens in this regard. For portrait photos I really like the out of focus background. The center sharpness at 2.8 is perfect for portraits.
I purchased this lens off Ebay from Quickdone which is the same as Prodigital2000 (Canadian Dealers). They were very helpful with my questions I sent them and delivery was fast and right to my door. The price was $400 less than anywhere else and I got a 6 year Canadian Tamron Warranty. I was very pleased with my Canadian price. (Not grey market lens) They give you 14 days for a full refund which is why I tested the lens heavily in my first 14 days. Could not find any problem or reason to return the lens. I can highly recommend these companies for purchase.
My final word is: If you are sitting on the fence as whether to cough up $2300 for Nikkor or Canon or to go with Tamron I would seriously say to take the leap to the Tamron. It may not have the panache of the Nikkor or Canon but those seeing your photos won’t know the difference and you can buy another lens with the leftover money. The quality of the Tamron is first rate. Good deal eh!! (Obviously I am Canadian)
Hi thanks for your updated review. I was curious if Tamron made any changes to this lens since it was first released to correct any of the clams of deteriorated sharpness at zoom range. Since this original post is from 2012 I think and there is now VR on the Nikon model. Anyway the price I am getting for the Nikon is 3,000, you quote 2,300 is that Canadian or US pricing? I also looked up Quickdone and Prodigital2000 on eBay and they didn’t come up.
Great review. Tamron seems to give most bang for buck. Better on the wide end than Nikon and slightly worse on the long end. Bravo Tamron. As mentioned in the review the Tarmon is indeed shorter than Nikon at all focal lengths. This is what I have observed too in the quick comparison I did:
As Tarmon is not as long as Nikon (60mm vs 70mm), the bokeh is not as pleasing as Nikon. However, the price and the VC alone can make you happy and accept the bokeh quality :) Furthermore, some of the Nikon users have had mechanical issues with 24-70 – stiff/stuck zoom or focus rings and apparently Nikon does not repair that under warranty. The average repair cost for stiff/stuck zoom or focus ring seems to be around $500 !
Apart from the focal length, is there any other reason not to buy this lens for a DX camera? Considering it for my D7200. Thanks!
Hi I’m planning to buy one of the lens between Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD and Tokina Fx 24-70mm f2.8 for my Nikon D610. Nikon Fx 24-70mm f2.8 VR is bit too expensive for me. I want a better image quality but VC/VR is equally important for me. I’m a casual photographer and use my camera mainly for travel photography. Currently most of my shots are landscape and some are portraits. I read the DXOMark review on these lens – tokina was rated better for it’s sharpness/image quality but lacks vibration control. VC will be useful in the low light/slow shutter condition and videography. I’m not sure how good VC in this Tamron lens. Both lens has consistent wide aperture to take Bokeh and can help me to carry less lens for travel photography. Initially I wanted to buy tokina because reviews says that it has better image sharpness. But it lacks VC so I’m confused. Photography is my hobby but I’ve a plan to take it to another level. I need suggestions on how much impact these lenses can make on my in camera photo outcome.
Tried out the Tamron for the week just for interest, absolute rubbish .
Took it back tried another one, just not there.
I bought the Canon 24-70 mk ii. Paid a lot more for it but what a power house.
It just does everything you want this lens to do.
Ok the Tamron maybe value for money but that’s all.
You may buy the Tamron but i bet down the track, you will eventually buy the Canon / Nikon.
Save up and buy the best now and really enjoy your photography, you won’t regret it.
I just recently bought the Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 Di VC USD for my D750, that I’m picking up next week. After reading about f / 4 having a different exposure then other apertures Had to do a few test shots on my D7100. I shot at f / 2.8, f / 4, f / 5.6, and f / 8, All exposures are consistent except f /2.8. I had to add one full stop on exposure compensation, to make f / 2.8 the same as the rest.
Your review above just looks perfect,
I have just bought a D7200 which is a crop sensor camera and i am confused between the 24-120 and the 24-70 ; Which one do you think should be a better option ? I like taking portraits and landscapes too and i also own a 50mm 1.8g