Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Sat Dec 20, 2014 4:52 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2011 7:33 pm 
I saw one person make light of this and how they were avoiding 2.8 because of it. Here's my experience with it,
http://www.pbase.com/shaunr/image/13470 ... iginal.jpg
Image
Looking at the wasp on the original size it's awfully soft, for a lack of a better word. Is this right? Exif says 1/1000 so it definitely wasn't shake lol. Did I miss the focus? I had it in manual and was moving the camera to get it right. I'm sure it looked okay when I took it. The next was at iso1600 but seems okay for it,
http://www.pbase.com/shaunr/image/13464 ... iginal.jpg
Image
Still soft around his eyes but not as obvious contrast I guess. This one seems ~slightly~ better,
http://www.pbase.com/shaunr/image/13460 ... iginal.jpg
Image
Probably just the diference between iso's. And these are just the striking diference between f8 and 2.8,
http://www.pbase.com/shaunr/image/13470 ... iginal.jpg
Image
http://www.pbase.com/shaunr/image/13470 ... iginal.jpg
Image
Has anyone else picked pixels apart with this lense or have any similar experiences?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2011 9:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:47 pm
Posts: 202
Location: Osijek
i read on other forum that people tend to buy the lens and some of them swear all they have in its perfect sharpness and others claim its super soft wide open, it seems it depends on the production series at witch it was made..

_________________
nikon d90 --->af-s dx 18-105mm; tamron 90mm macro

add me up on:

flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bakica/

deviant art:
http://tbensic.deviantart.com/

----:>bakice ce vladati svjetom<:----


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 14, 2011 10:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:59 pm
Posts: 6009
Location: The Netherlands
Well, it's not razor sharp wide open, but acceptable if you ask me.

_________________
I take pictures so quickly, my highschool was "Continuous High".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 8:01 am 
my experience with this lens left me with a very good impression of the F/2.8 sharpness. I would avoid F/2.8 on the newer Tamron,but on the old,it's as good as you'll get on a bright aperture budget zoom.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 5:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 11:30 am
Posts: 212
Location: Phnom Penh
sorry then that mean the The older non VC tamron are better then New VC in therm of sharpest. :?:

I thought about recommend my friend of this lens as alternative lens to the used Canon EF-S 15-85 or 17-85. :)

I wonder why it so big and heavier compare to old one. :?:

Sorry for the question. :oops:

_________________
Canon EOS 7D + Red Canon IXUS 300HS.
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L,Canon EF 100mm F/2.8L IS USM.
Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 APO EX DG OS HSM, Sigma 50mm F/1.4 HSM
Canon Speedlite 480EX II + Tripod+ B+W MRC (2x77+67), hoya HD UV (77) B+W MRC 77mm(CPL slim+10 ND).


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group