24-70mm. Three choices

N

newhere

Suspended / Banned
Messages
14
Hello everyone.
I really appreciate all the help I've received here. I've managed to get a new body and a speedlight so far.
Now it is time for a lens.
I've got a 50mm 1.8 nikon lens that I'm using for every day shooting and some of my kids.
But I need something with a bit of range choice, as I want to take photos in different settings . mainly portrait , kids (which means some fast shots)and newborn.

The body I have is a nikon d810
I've done some research and managed to test out some lenses. 24-70 seems like a great range for now.
So far I've tried out both of nikons offerings. and I have liked both. I noticed a difference between VR and non VR when hand holding and testing it out. the third I've heard about and seen images from are the tamron, which looks great too. I know there is also a sigma in this range but I've not heard much about it

Really I'm wondering how the stabilisation of the tamron is compared to the nikons. there is a large difference in price between all three so I was really wondering what the main real world differences are and if the price difference is seen in real world performance, not just stabilisation but over all image quality too.
 
After doing quite a bit of research I've read even more good things about the tamron.
I've seen some comparisons that show it a little sharper wide open. but also that it isn't a true 70mm when close to a subject because of how it focuses.
It seems to be between the tamron and the nikkor VR. I'd love to hear from anyone who has used either or both
 
I've used several copies of the Tamron and found it to be a brilliant lens, was my most used lens on the D800 I had for a few years. Found its to be suitably sharp and the VR was very useful, something I'm missing on my equivalent Fuji 16-55 f2.8.

Personally I wasn't forking out the extra for the new Nikon 24-70 VR when the Tamron can be found for less than £500 used
 
In terms of AF speed I have not found anything that can match the Nikon 24-70mm, it's insane. In terms of IQ there's not much in it sharpness wise between the Nikon and Tamron (assuming you get a good copy of the Tamron) but I still prefer the colours, contrast and bokeh of the Nikon. Of course YMMV. I've never found I need VR on lens like this tbh, but if you do can you justify the cost of the Nikon VR over the Tamron? I couldn't. My choice would be a used Nikon 24-70mm.

However, I recently sold mine as I find that I always chose the 24-120mm f4 over the 24-70mm. Now I'm not going to say it's as good as the 24-70mm overall, but in terms of sharpness there's little to choose, very little, maybe nothing. I still preferred the overall rendering of the 24-70mm, just, but for my type of shooting I just find 24-70mm too restrictive which was ultimately why I chose the 24-120mm over the 24-70mm. Add to this that it's noticeably lighter, and has VR (more useful at 120mm) it becomes more apparent why I chose it. My only wish is that it had the AF speed of the 24-70mm (and was f2.8 but then it would be very heavy and very expensive ;)). Just food for thought.
 
Had the old Tamron 28-75 2.8 which was a decent lens and overall great value for money. Got the 24-70 and it is better in every way. If budget allows get the Nikon.
 
Tbh I doubt a 3rd party lens could beat the Nikon 24-70. There's a reason it has been around so long. However a 3rd party lens may be good enough for what you need.
Not sure why you would need VR on a lens of that focal length though.
 
I've got the Tamron and love it. I got it before the Nikon VR version came out so the VC was an added bonus on top of being quite a bit cheaper than Nikon. I also liked the colour rendition better on the Tamron then I did on the Nikon. I use it on a Nikon D700 and D7000.
 
I have the non VR version of the Nikon AFS 24-70mm f2.8 lens, if I have read reports properly is just a bit sharper than the VR latest version which I have not tried. Just to point out VR is great for handheld but pointless if on a tripod , so you might be able to get a used non VR quite a bit cheaper. I have not had any problem hand holding on a Nikon D 800 and there is usually some sort of support you can use like a wall to steady up if you need to
 
Last edited:
like you, I had the option of all three...

I tried a 2nd hand Nikon and Tamron & Sigma new... Nikon won hands down every time, and is now my most used lens :) (and I don't have the VR version, and not missed it either!)
 
I have the Tamron, paired with my D750. Generally very happy with it.

TBH unless you are going to compare side by side against the Nikon, you won't feel like you're missing out on anything, as it is a solid performer in pretty much any situation. For family shots etc as you have suggested, it will be spot on.

If you can justify the price, buy the Nikon - it will be the better all rounder... however I would question whether it is £500+ better.
 
I was on the same situation a while ago. I had the Nikon 24-120, great lens but no so good in low light. I looked at the Nikon 24-70 VR and the Tamron equivalent. After reading many reviews and talking to different people I went with the Tamron and I couldn't be happier...and I have saved some good money to put towards studio lightning.
I have to say it works great on my D750.
 
I cannot speak for the Nikons' as they were above my budget, so for me when I looked it was the tamron v the Nikon 24-120mm f4. In the end went with the tamron, at first my initial impress was that 24-70 was not as wide as expected and perhaps the 24-120 would have been better. But once I had re-learnt what my feet were for it did not rally matter and with 36 mega-pixels you can always crop.

I always have the vc switches on with the tamron, to be honest I don't really know its there most of the time, what little photography I have managed to do this year I have tried to keep the shutter speed up. But there have been times, such shooting in the woods that the vc has come into its own and has helped me get the shot.

The time in the States shooting, the 24-70 was the lenses that was on the camera the most.
 
Thank you for the help with this.
My aim is to move in to doing family and newborn shooting professionally, im not sure if that ultimate aim would effect the choice between these lenses.
 
I think what I'm asking is, given the closeness in quality between the three , is the tamron professional quality? So far, it is looking like it would be suitable, but I just want to make sure I'm not missing anything
 
Used both the Nikon (non VR) and Tamron. Couldn't really tell them apart IQ wise.

I'm now using 24-120 F4 and also can't say I have noticed and considerable IQ change from the 24-70 at F4 onwards lol.

Both Tamron and Nikon very good. Take your pick. The VC was definitely handy for me though.

And all the above mentioned lenses will give pro results!
 
Difficult to determine professional quality (somewhat subjective), however the Tamron is pretty damn solid - weather sealed too. Tamron also give you a 5 year warranty with their lenses, which is quite nice.

Ultimately if money is not the concern, go for the Nikon and don't worry. If you can't justify the significant price difference now, go for the Tamron - you won't be disappointed.

There are plenty of working togs out there with Tamron lenses... you can always chop in the Tamron and "upgrade" in the future, should you feel the Tamron is holding you back professionally, once it's earning you money.
 
Newwhere give me a shout if you want to have a look at a raw file, if that would help.
 
Both the Tamron 24-70 VC and Nikon VR are very good. Never used the non VR Nikon but I've heard it's also superb. The Tamron is a lot cheaper than the Nikon VR and I'd say it either matches it or is very close in performance. Pictures are made by a photographer's skills not a tiny difference in a lens though
 
Suomi, i would really appreciate a raw file to have a look at.
I think I'll be going tamron, thanks again for all the help everyone has given
 
I have the Tamron after trying out both in the shop. I could not see any difference in image quality.
Has anyone bothered to AFFT this lens?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top