First hands-on review of the Tamron 24mm ƒ/2.8 Di III OSD - Printable Version +- Opticallimits (https://forum.opticallimits.com) +-- Forum: Forums (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4) +--- Forum: Sony (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14) +--- Thread: First hands-on review of the Tamron 24mm ƒ/2.8 Di III OSD (/showthread.php?tid=4587) |
First hands-on review of the Tamron 24mm ƒ/2.8 Di III OSD - stoppingdown - 12-06-2019 With some samples (not many macros that I'd like to see): https://sonyalpha.blog/2019/12/04/tamron-24mm-f2-8-di-iii-osd-m-12-f051/ It looks like the only defect is distortion (and noisy AF for those who does video recording). RE: First hands-on review of the Tamron 24mm ƒ/2.8 Di III OSD - Juli1a - 03-13-2020 First is the very strong distortion which needs to be corrected for many images liteblue. RE: First hands-on review of the Tamron 24mm ƒ/2.8 Di III OSD - Klaus - 03-13-2020 I'm slightly wondering whether those 3 Tamron lenses are really so interesting. These are all f/2.8s after all. The 20mm is, IMHO, the most useful of three. The other two ... RE: First hands-on review of the Tamron 24mm ƒ/2.8 Di III OSD - Brightcolours - 03-13-2020 (03-13-2020, 07:45 AM)Klaus Wrote: I'm slightly wondering whether those 3 Tamron lenses are really so interesting. These are all f/2.8s after all.You are correct in that they are only f2.8, and as such would also be covered by f2.8 standard zooms. However, there is only the Sony E 16-55mm f2.8 G, which is pricy (€1300) and pretty heavy (~500 grams). And that lens only achieves 1:5 magnification, where these Tamron lenses' USP is their 1:2 macro ability. That makes 3 arguments for the Tamron f2.8 primes.
Taken with a 35mm at 1:2, vertical images stitched., shot with Canon APS-C. The FF equivalent to 35mm on Canon APS-C is 56mm. Also shooting with a 55mm 1:2 (max. magnification) lens on FF I can appreciate these Tamron 1:2 APS-C offerings.... The choice of FOV matters for the outcome, also at close up and macro ranges. Taken on FF with a Nikkor 55mm f3.5 micro. So if my platform would be Sony APS-C, I would be quite interested in this Tamron trio, due to their close up ability. RE: First hands-on review of the Tamron 24mm ƒ/2.8 Di III OSD - JJ_SO - 03-13-2020 (03-13-2020, 11:24 AM)Brightcolours Wrote:(03-13-2020, 07:45 AM)Klaus Wrote: I'm slightly wondering whether those 3 Tamron lenses are really so interesting. These are all f/2.8s after all.You are correct in that they are only f2.8, and as such would also be covered by f2.8 standard zooms. Very beautiful shots, BC. Thanks for sharing. RE: First hands-on review of the Tamron 24mm ƒ/2.8 Di III OSD - Brightcolours - 03-14-2020 Thanks JoJu. I have posted them before I am sure, but they illustrate well why these wider angle 1:2 magnification primes are not so uninteresting to others. Of course, these two were done with 35mm APS-C equivalents... But in one image I used that 35mm to create a wider view. Another APS-C 35mm 1:2 mag. image: The 35mm APS-C perspective gives a nice depth with not very distant flowers getting appreciatively smaller. That effect of course gets more pronounced with 24mm APS-C but the Tamron primes (of course) will show less astigmatism and CA issues. RE: First hands-on review of the Tamron 24mm ƒ/2.8 Di III OSD - Rover - 03-16-2020 Great shots there BC. I can also see the merit of using these lenses as stopgaps: - the 24mm is a bargain bin wide companion for anyone using the 28-75 as their main lens; - ditto the 20mm, but it's also useful in the same role for anyone whose standard zoom bottoms out at 24mm; - the 35mm is a bargain bin semi-standard companion for the users of the 17-28 or a wideangle that tops out at 24mm, before the tele. It's really similar to how people are using a 50mm ish lens as a stopgap between the 16-35 and 70-something. I've been doing that for ages now. Of course it would not be a consideration for someone who owns both the 17-28 and the 28-75. RE: First hands-on review of the Tamron 24mm ƒ/2.8 Di III OSD - Brightcolours - 03-16-2020 Valid points, Rover. For myself, I wanted a 20mm on FF to get really wide close up ability and bought a Voigtlander 20mm f3.5 partly for that. Regrettably, the Voigtlander is totally not suited for that (due to heavy astigmatism close up). If the 20/24mm Tamrons would have existed for EF mount, I would have bought one of those instead. |