Fast F 2.8. Extremely sharp even wide open. As sharp as my Canon17-40 L lens. Excellent contrast. Quite light given its' use of 14 Groups and 16 Elements.

None

As a professional Fashion/Beauty and Advertising photographer of over twenty years, my demands for optical excellence are quite stringent. I recently used this lens for a fashion editorial shoot and can say that this lens is wonderful. Fast and accurate auto focus and brutally sharp at 3.2 and above. Very good at 2.8. I use this lens on a Canon 20D+ BG-E2 Grip and it marries very well with it. I shot some beauty close up images and was amazed by the detail that this little lens resolved. The eye lashes bounced off of the page. I was also very pleased with the color rendition. The contrast of this lens is perhaps the best of all of the lenses I own and have owned in the past. Control of flare is superb. There is very little vignetting especially on the 20D which has a 1.6 ratio. The "Bokeh" on the Tamron is beautiful especially wide open. Be sure to purchase a UV filter for this lens to protect the front element. I especially appreciate the close focus capabilities of this lens. Not quite a macro, but very close. I also own the Tamron XR Di Macro 90 2.8 lens and must say that these two lenses are the best of the Tamron arsenal. Final point. Would I recommend this lens to a working professional? Yes, Yes, Yes unequivocally! You may view some samples of my published work at my photo agent sites and by clicking on my name "Benjamin Kanarek". http://www.virginiaberthy.com PARIS http://www.slave-unit.com LONDON You may also join my commercial photography group called FashionMode 1 at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fashionmode1/

Customer Service

None

Similar Products Used:

17-40L Canon Still Own

SHARP! quick AF well built Price Price Price

Lens hood a little flimsy but not too bad

Bought the Tamron 28-75 after reading good reviews on a few different sites. One thing I kept reading was the the AF was slow. What?!? The AF is anything but slow. Not "quite" as fast as USM but if .00001 second bothers you then well I guess you need a $1200 Canon. Me? .005 seconds is fast enough. The lens is compact, lightweight compared to the Canon "L" and SHARP! The build, while not a Canon "L" is very good. Again, if you make your living with your lens(es) and expose them to lots of abuse, get an "L" but if you make the occasional buck and shoot for pleasure, you will like the build of the Tamron. Another thing I read was possible softness at 2.8. It is no where near as soft as some of my other lenses when they are stopped down. So I guess the softness issue is a matter of perspective. Is it softer at 2.8 than F/11? sure, but what lens is not? Soft by any other measure? Not to me. Definately usable. I had also heard that there was a possibility of getting a bad copy due to QC issues. Not me thankfully. 1st time was a charm! Bottom line is this is a very nice lens for the price.

Customer Service

not needed yet...

Similar Products Used:

Canon 24-70mm, 28-105mm, 85mm, 50mm, 35 mm Tokina 400 f/5.6 Sigma 100-300

fast at f2.8 all the way good build L like image quality at all focal lengths smaller lighter

too bad it's not 24-75 front element extends when zooming focusing is not parfocal zooming is opposite direction as Canon not ring USM some slight yellow cast indoors in fluorescent lighting

It is a bit expensive in our country at U$428 compared to the US where it goes for about U$350, but it was worth it to get the warranty when I bought it last May 2004.I wanted a good lens to replace my ef 28-105 f3.5-4.5 w/c was good but tended to flare a lot. And I'm glad I did get it locally. The first copy I had was very, very bad! It was terrible! Fuzzy even when stopped down! The replacement copy was fantastic! It was the first time I experienced the L-like quality from a lens. It was very sharp and contrasty. For the first time, when we saw the images, we knew we could go to the lab to have it printed without processing. And when you post process it (PP), man that sharpness multiplies it some more that you can overdo it making the image unbelievably sharp. So we don't PP it too as much as we do with our other lenses. The lens tend to have a slight yellow cast. I notice this more in indoor shots with fluorescent lighting. As I got used to this lens, I don't seem to notice this cast anymore. But it is easy to remove anyway with PS. And at times, the warming does help make the skin tones much better. The lens is a bit heavy compared to my ef 28-105, but definitely not as heavy as the 24-70L. It is not as big either. And even more surprising, it is 1/4 the price of that L lens!!! And it is fun to carry around because it is not as heavy or as big. Filter is 67mm though. The front element does not move when you focus, but it extends and retracts on zooming. It is also a bit stiff with mine. After 5 months of heavy use and about 10 weddings, it is still stiff. I decided to "exercise" it last night and now the zoom is now smoother and not jerky like the 17-35mm brother. This lens is the perfect partner for my newer tamron 17-35 f2.8-4.0 Di lens. And since it is not a Di-2, these lenses will work with standard 35mm formats without vignetting. It too is contrasty and sharp even wide open. But the 28-75 Di performs better at f4 and higher. And I notice that it tends to perform better at the 40-75mm range than the 28mm range, not that the wide end is bad, but you can notice that the longer end is sharper and punchier. At f5.6 at all FL, this lens is almost invinsible and you can probably say it's hard to tell them apart from the L counterparts. The lens is so sharp that at f2.8 at 50mm, you will find it hard to differentiate it with the ef 50mm f1.8 mkII at f2.8! I don't bring the 50mm with me anymore unless I know I will be shooting in really dark places where I will need f1.8-2.0. and what the 50mm f1.8 cannot do that my tamron can is handle those nasty flares. This lens is very good at managing flare. The 50mm sucks it in badly. The 50mm f1.8 is sharp but does not have the coating to arrest the flare. AF is not ring USM fast, but it is not slow. For a DC motor it is fast because it does not have to travel far. Even on my D60 w/ a slower and older AF technology, it is fast enough that I don't miss the processional in weddings even in low light churches. AF is faster and surer than the 50mm f1.8 mkII. I have used this lens as my main lens in 10 weddings now since May. It is really a good all around performer. My only comnplaint is that I don't have 24mm and I miss the 100-105mm of my ef 28-105. It is very sharp and contrasty and at f4 really is already excellent. At f5.6 with group pictures at 28mm, it is really sharp and contrasty. And the macro. Yes, the macro is unbelievable. It is very sharp and contrasty at the center. You won't need the 100mm f2.8 macro for shooting wedding rings, arrays, flowers, etc. It is very sharp at the center at f8-13. You can get in very close at 13 inches even at 75mm with the macro. I shot some jewelry with it and the detail is unbelievable. The tamron 28-75 Di is will go down in the annals of lenses as one of the best ever made for such a low, low price. Too bad it does not have ring USM. Like the 24-70L and the 17-40L, it is now the poor man's L-lens. And this lens is so good, that Minolta will be re-badging this lens, together with the 17-35 f2.8-4 Di for their upcoming minolta DSLR the D7d. This is how its reputation of this lens precedes it. So, when some people pooh-pooh this lens, it will not be because it is optically deficient, it is because of some other reasons (not ring USM, no weather sealing, build, etc). In our country, many people did not buy this at first because it was not popular at first. But once I got this lens rolling due to the shots I saw at dpreview and they saw my shots with it, the 28-75 Di is now stocked in many stores and preferred by those budget conscious but are pros or semi-pros who want good image quality without mortgaging their house. I just recently got the 17-35 f2.8-4 Di and now my wide end is complete. My only weakness now is the 70-200 f2.8 range. I am still looking at the canon ef, IS version of that years away as it is beyond my reach. If Tamron will sell a 70-200 f2.8 Di even without IS, I might consider it because I know it will be ligther, smaller and cheaper (about U$700 same as sigma). And hopefully, like it's shorter FL brothers, it will also be optically on par with the L lenses without the price tag. Apparently there was some QC issues with this lens so maybe it will be next year before we see the 70-200 Di. Otherwise, an all tamron lineup from 17-200 with around f2.8 avg aperture and L like imager quality for about 1/3 the price of a similar L lineup is something I would be happy to have. For now having the 17-35 and 28-75 Di is already 90% of my shooting needs especially when covering weddings. My 50mm f1.8 mkII and my ef 28-105 is no longer being used because they are not as good optically as the Di series. Perhaps, aside from the L equivalent that challenges this lens, the other serious contender of this lens right now is the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 DC. That too was a good performer though with some blue fringing in some instances. This lens does not have any CA at all and handles flare very well. The Sigma has the advantage of the wide end being covered at f2.8 up to 50mm. The Tamron is wide at 28mm only. But the Sigma is good only for APS sized sensors. The Tamron will work with 35mm format sensors or film. If this is not important to you, Sigma would be a good substitute. If the sigma 18-50mm would have appeared together with this lens, it would be a difficult choice. But I needed the longer reach better for weddings and I knew I would have to get the 17-35 at an extra cost to cover my wide end. The 75mm is something I needed more. In fact, I needed an f2.8 100 at least, but we don't have a zoom with that speed and range at this time. Yes, the tamron is not as good as the 24-70L, but for the price it is a bargain. My only tip is that if you encounter a bad copy of this, give it a chance because it is worth it once you get a good copy. This lens is one of those classic lenses that will be noted as one of Tamron's best lenses ever made.

Customer Service

ok that my vendor replaced my bad copy in less than a week.

Similar Products Used:

canon ef 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 mkI canon ef 28-70 f3.5-4.5

Price Constant f2.8 Sharpness

Doesn't feel quite as well built as Sigma EX lenses.

Great lens for the money. I can't fault this lens in terms of optical quality, images are razor sharp at f4 and above. AF is very quick and reasonably quiet. Build quality is not quite as good (in my opinion) as my Sigma EX lenses, however that's not to say it's bad. Overall, an excellent buy.

Customer Service

not needed

- cheap - small and compact - lightweight - good AF, pretty fast (but not Canon fast) - good sharpness (not wide open)

- sharpness wide open - contrast - zoom has an opposite direction to turn than Canon - You don't have the feeling it will last forever - it is plastic! - The hood is made really cheap

Hello everybody, I just sold my lens. is it a good start for this review? :) I used this lens for half a year on my 10D, purchased it early this year after reading the reviews here. What is my opinion? I think it is a great lense for the money!!! Far much better than Sigma 24-70 or Canon 28-105 what I used before. It is really a decent lense, works well, AF is pretty fast and accurate, and above 5.6 it is pretty sharp too. Not too heavy either, so you can hand hold it for a few hours without feeling that your muscles exist. So why did I sell it? I wasn't really happy with the sharpness, especially wide open, and I couldn't live together with the pictures in general. Than 2 months ago I tried the Canon 24-70 L of my friend, and it was over. I had to upgrade. You are right, it is 3 times more expensive than the Tamron, but... Try it once, and you will understand what I mean. Make the sames shots with Tamron and Canon. The difference? Tamron makes a great picture. Canon? it is so real you want to touch... Does the difference worth the price? You decide. Still, Tamron I beleive is a very good lense, does its job well, and unless you have money for the Canon L, this is the lens to get!

Customer Service

Not needed.

Similar Products Used:

Sigma 24-70 2.8 Sigma 28-70 2.8 Tokina 28-70 2.8 (similar optical quality) Canon 28-105 3.5-4-5 USM Canon 24-70 L

sharpness, contrast, distortion, against the light qualities, size, Price.

As I mentioned, I would have like to see this superb lens in metal body verssion.

This lens is something I was hopping to get for many years. I works excellently on my F90X and the results are very sharp. In fact it's the best lens of this kind I ever owned and resolution wise it's proved to be better than mighty Canon. The slides are super sharp from corner to corner at any aperture, the pincushion distortion is far less than in Sigma for example and it's hardly noticable. The quality of the shots taken against the light is superb. There is hardly any evidence of flare. The size of this lens is also unbelievable a bit bigger than my Nikon 28-70 3.5/4.5. All this for a ridiculous price of 330usd. The only thing I can come up with is the fact that the barrel of this lens could have been made of aluminum instead of plastic even as a separate series for pros. I would have paid even 200 usd to get more reliable mechanism. Not that I had any problem until now but just to be on the safe side. I shoot with this lens a trip to Copenhagen last month mostly in poor lighting conditions and the results are second to none! A real killer that worth every cent you pay for it. I wonder why didn't they make them earlier.

Customer Service

no need

Similar Products Used:

Tokina AT-X 35-70 2.8 Sigma 28-70 2.8 reg + EX. 24-70 2.8 EX Nikon 28-70 3.5 /4.5

Light weight, Size not big, Well-built, Very sharp when stop down 1 or 2 steps. Good distortion control.

Not as quiet as Canon USM lenses. Focus ring turns while auto focusing.

This Tamron 28-75mm XR Di lens is one of the very few non-Canon lenses I acquired since I bought my Canon 10D just over a year ago. I did not have chance to practice my skill very intentionally. However, I do shop on Ebay and acquired a lot of Canon EF lenses. And whenever I have chance, I would take shots with the 10D. So I do have experience of using a lot of EF lenses. I did not have strong intention to trying a Tamron because I thought generally the Canon brand lenses should be better. However the strong rave reviews for this lens caught my attention to it. So I placed a bid and won an auction on Ebay. The lens I purchased was in like-brand-new condition. It does seem to work properly. I tried many shots within a few days after receiving it. My first impression is that this lens does have quality up to the review level at this site. I personally would rate it 4.75. Let me simply make some comparisons to the Canon zoom lenses I have used. First, I think this one significantly surpass the Canon consumer zoom lenses like 35-70mm, 35-80mm, 28-105mm and even 20-35mm USM (not the 20-35mm L, which I have not used.) The sharpness of this lens is, to me, at least at the level of 28-80mm L, may be better. I sold the 28-80 L last year. If I have to choose between two, I would pick this Tamron because it is lighter, smaller and performs at least as well as the Canon L. At wide open, Canon L may win by a small margin. But I can always boost the Canon 10D’s ISO and choose f/4 or smaller. Also, I use AV mode to set it to f/5.6 when I use flash. Canon 10D always choose f/2.8 for Tamron if I use P mode for flash photography. (Maybe Canon intentionally pick a bad choose? Or simply Canon did not put effort to optimizing Tamron’s aperture?) What about Canon’s expensive 28-135mm? I think this lens is good for general-purpose photos. But its optical quality is just slightly above the 28-105mm, but not much more. You pay premium for the IS, which could be useful at times. However, this 28-135mm is not good for bigger prints for sure! If you use tripod or any other object around you, you can reduce the shake significantly. So to me, the optical quality plays a more important role. At the similar aperture, this Tamron wins most of the games over Canon’s 28-135mm. So I am thinking letting this good 28-135mm lens go! This Tamron is newly designed for digital SLR's. It has good distortion and flare controls. It auto-focus reasonably fast. It acts and sounds like my old 50mm 1:1.8 (metal version.)It has a zoom lock so that the zoom won't fall out if you hang your camera downwords. If you want to know how this lens works at different apertures or focus lengths, my test basically agrees with the reviews in popphotography.com (the famous popular photo mag.) You may go there and read the full review. What I want to emphasize here is that to my own experience, I would rate this lens better than Canon’s 28-135mm and even 28-80mm L over all. I myself would believe that it is a good decision to replace my 28-135mm and 28-80mm L with this one. If I were a professional, I would pick Canon 24-70mm L. But this Tamron is definitely a bang for the buck!

Customer Service

Do not show any signs of going wrong!

Similar Products Used:

Canon 28-80mm f/2.8-4 L, Canon 28-135mm IS USM, Canon 28-105mm USM, Canon 35-70mm EF.

Great optics. Small size and light in weight.

Not USM

The optics is at the top professional class in terms of sharpness, color & distortion. It is better than the much loved retired classic Canon 28-70mm f2.8 L in the flare control at all focal ranges, and it is without color abbreviations at high contrast situations around the edges of 28mm range when enlarged to 8X12". Very usuable even at wide open although not advisable. Enthusiastically recommended even disregarding the cost factor.

Customer Service

None.

Similar Products Used:

Canon 28-70mm f2.8 L, many FD lenses, many RB67 Lenses.

sharpeness, reasonable price

none

I was looking for a affordable "fast", sharp lense for my Minolta Dynax/Maxxum 7, and this is it! Especially from 35 - 75mm the pictures with this lense are amazing. Also at 28mm it gives very good quality. The color-balance is good enough, also distortions are little.

Similar Products Used:

Tokina Pro-SV 28-70, Minolta 24-85; Minolta 50 (1.7);

Price, aperture, sharpness acceptable even at 2.8, lightweight and compact, and again price.

Slow AF speed, noticeable under some circumstances.

I had this lens for a week, and returned it to B&H for a 24-70L. Except for the slow AF speed compared to USM or HSM lens, this is an excellent lens. Would it have focused faster, I'd have gladly kept it and sang it's praises. See http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=9309063 gary

Customer Service

N/A

Similar Products Used:

Canon 24-70L Canon 18-55 kit lens Canon 70-200L non IS