[toni-a]

Ok the sample is good and hard to explain CA and vignetting by sample variation, quite a disappointing review, however would it be possible to test another sample ? the results seem too bad to be true. 

[Klaus]

Ok the sample is good and hard to explain CA and vignetting by sample variation, quite a disappointing review, however would it be possible to test another sample ? the results seem too bad to be true.

Sorry, no retests. We are already doing entry tests to avoid lemons. If this was a bad sample the MTF charts would look more erratic.

[davidmanze]

  OK this is a thanks for the warning style review........

   

  ......surprisingly uninspired sharpness from 50mm up at the borders, poor vignetting and CAs...     and all this from a top of the range  expensive OEM lens...huge heavy and expensive! 

 

  I suppose the question is: Is the Tamron better?    at the longer end it looks to be, has better CAs and can be bought for a lot less money!

[JJ_SO]

The Tamron OR the Sigma 

 

Meanwhile Nikon users do have nice choices. Maybe someone should tell Nikon about that.

[Rover]

The Tamron had its share of gotchas as well methinks - like vignetting and distortion - but the resolution seemed better in both Canon- and Nikon-based tests. And then, the G2 version is looming...

[Klaus]

The Sony 24-70mm f/2.8 is probably the only fast std zoom lens that is good. I don't expect anything from the new Sigma and Tamron.


But then this is a useless lens category - not really fast, excessively heavy and big, very expensive relative to what they offer. PERSONALLY I couldn't care less.


Something like the Canon 24-70mm f/4 makes more sense.


But we are all different.

[JJ_SO]

...

But then this is a useless lens category - not really fast, excessively heavy and big, very expensive relative to what they offer. PERSONALLY I couldn't care less.

...

 

Same here. I just think, wedding and event photographers like it very much. I'm neither that nor the other.

[toni-a]

Go tell this to wedding photographers for whom this lens is an absolute standard

the classic Nikon  trio almost every professional photographer using Nikon has   14-24/24-70/70-200

 

But then this is a useless lens category - not really fast, excessively heavy and big, very expensive relative to what they offer. PERSONALLY I couldn't care less.


 

[davidmanze]

The Tamron had its share of gotchas as well methinks - like vignetting and distortion - but the resolution seemed better in both Canon- and Nikon-based tests. And then, the G2 version is looming...

 Yes, the Tamron is less sharp at wider angles but better at the long end, vignetting is almost a stop better as are CAs......this is disappointing after the "rabbit from the hat trick"  70-200mm E VRII.  

  I don' t know how much the Nikon is, but I see it at well over two grand, the Tamron can be had for less than "a" grand, so the latter has some good excuses!       Bring on the G2!  

 

  Gotchas from the Tamron?  .....a few ..but financially the Nikon will have gotcha by the short and curlies..  :o

 

 The Tamron at 70mm focused closely was less than 45mm effective FOV, How's the Nikor here?

[JJ_SO]

Go tell this to wedding photographers for whom this lens is an absolute standard

the classic Nikon  trio almost every professional photographer using Nikon has   14-24/24-70/70-200

As those are the only goldring zooms Nikon has to offer with f/2.8, there's not much of a choice.

 

One can find comfort in the knowledge the 24-120 and 24-85 are much worse