[toni-a]

15 mm wide f2,8 amd stabilized lens really too good to be true

Interested in the lens however knowing the technical challenge it raises I don't know what to expect and since it doesn't exist here. importing it, without possibility for return/exchange  seems crazy

[Klaus]

Markus is on it (more or less)

[Brightcolours]

It is a very sharp lens, beating the Nikkor 14-24mm f2.8 in performance.

[Rover]

Sounds kinda too good to be true BC! I've never owned the 14-24 - having left the Nikon camp before it was released - but I worked with files from it, years later. Sharp corners at 14mm, wide open, on a full frame body. Un-freaking-believable. The Tamron has to be extraordinary in order to meet, let alone beat, this standard.

[Brightcolours]

I thought it was common knowledge by now?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbs4VYlkMjM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpg6keKSRI8

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4651324...8-shootout

https://photographylife.com/reviews/tamr...0mm-f2-8/3

[JJ_SO]

Unless I don't see comparison files I seriously doubt Tamron beating the Nikon. I have the 14-24 and I know how it performs.


Edit: Now I saw a comparison: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4651324...8-shootout

 

I would not say "beat it" but they are extremely close to each other and since the Nikon is 50% more and super sensitve in backlight conditions and with it's front lens, somebody looking for a ultra-wide angle zoom and daring to trust Tamron's manufacturing has not much of a choice.

[davidmanze]

   Just as a matter of interest "Tony Northrup Photography" dropped the Tamron and showed an image of the result, it was completely broken into many pieces with bits hanging out, Tony didn't look to bothered as it was on loan from Tamron!

 

  I think Sigma's construction is better. 

[JJ_SO]

The price difference has to have a reason. I wouldn't feel too confident about dropping the Nikon 14-24, but depending on zoom position I think I'd get away with minor scratches and of course functional lens afterwards.

 

Sigma has to prove they can do an ultra-wide zoom. Given the weight of the lenses so far, I would fear more for the floor than for the lens. 

[Rover]

Hey BC - I have no doubt that the Tamron is a great lens (though there hasn't been a review by major site yet - I think - a few individual photographers have evaluated it to positive results) but the Nikon is a living legend.

P.S. Anybody wants to buy my 16-35 L II that has been gone over at the service with a new rubber gasket installed to boot...?

[Brightcolours]

Hey BC - I have no doubt that the Tamron is a great lens (though there hasn't been a review by major site yet - I think - a few individual photographers have evaluated it to positive results) but the Nikon is a living legend.

P.S. Anybody wants to buy my 16-35 L II that has been gone over at the service with a new rubber gasket installed to boot...?

If Matt Granger and DPReview don't count as "major".... Hmmm.

How about lenstip then?

http://www.lenstip.com/432.11-Lens_revie...mmary.html

 

"If I had to choose a winner of that duel I would point at the Tamron but I have to say it was only slightly better."


 

Or Cameralabs?

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Tamron...dict.shtml

 

"This Nikkor earned a Highly Recommended rating in my review but even its very good image quality is surpassed by the Tamron in almost every comparison."

 

Another "individual" photographer:

http://improvephotography.com/33254/tamr...cape-lens/

 

"If that wasn’t clear enough, I’ll put it this way.  I used to own a Nikon 14-24mm and a Nikon 16-35mm.  I still own a Tamron 15-30."