03-05-2015, 08:30 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-05-2015, 08:31 PM by Klaus.)
The problem is ... at this price point ... would you really go for the Tamron instead of the Nikkor ?
BTW, the centering of the Nikkor isn't so hot.
Quote:The problem is ... at this price point ... would you really go for the Tamron instead of the Nikkor ?
BTW, the centering of the Nikkor isn't so hot.
The Tamron is 40% less expensive currently. It's closer in price to the Lumix 7-14/4 which makes the Tamron look like a whole lotta lens for the price.
/Dave
http://dave9t5.zenfolio.com
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbs4VYlkMjM
Thanks for the link Brightcolours!
Well that's that then!
The Tamron is sharper at the long end, pretty much equal everywhere else, it's loss of 1mm FL at the wide end is really it's only losing point though even that is compensated by it's extra reach, the VR is real boon and it's $600 cheaper. Flare and starbursts smoked the Nikon!
Luckily for us the "clumsy" Matt Granger has already done the drop tests and the Tamron even came up trumps in that department by still being functional, it was a "dustpan and brush" scenario for the two Nikons!
If ever there was a case to say... "are there any questions"? this is it!
I think he talks about dropping the less plastic Nikkor 24-70mm f2.8 3 times and breaking it in half 3 times, and dropping the more plastic feeling Tamron 24-70mm VC and it surviving (to illustrate that the more sturdy feel of the 14-24mm Nikkor does not mean it actually is more sturdy/durable).
Well I'm sure he'll drop plenty more, he'll keep us up dated!
To me is good to see similar performance at lower price. On the other hand will be good to see some feed back from actual use independent reviewers, so far only the "product pushers" are reporting. I believe the price of the Tamron will go down after several months. I am using Tokina 16-28 now and I am quite happy with it. For $599 is quite good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9KIgsXQ0Ng