Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,333   Posts: 1,537,409   Online: 1165
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21
  1. #1
    OldBodyOldSoul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    190

    Nikon 28-105 or Tamron 24-135?

    So I want to get one of those funny looking do-it-all lenses... zooms is what they call them, right?
    Seriously, I've come to the point where I am happy with what I have (considering the budget) but for the first time in forever I find myself wishing I had one lens that could do most of shooting, at least in certain situations.
    I have looked around and pretty much nailed these two down for final consideration:
    Nikon 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 and Tamron 24-135 f/3.5-5.6

    The usual question: Which one do you prefer at their common focal lengths?
    Even if you have used only one of these, it's fine to leave your comment on it and I will try to cram it all into one useful piece of information (or I will just flip a coin, depends on moon phase).

    What I "know" is that the Nikon is excellent. I also "know" that the Tamron is excellent and that is very good at 24mm, which I like a lot (wide end is more important to me than long). I have no idea how they compare in build, feel while zooming dnd manually focusing... but I do know that Nikon costs about 50% more.

    My wishes/requirements, in case you have some other ideas.
    - I want it to work with both film and digital, so it must have the aperture ring. My cameras are FM2n, F3, F100 and D90.
    - Manual is ok, though since I am trying to provide myself with an easy shooting option, AF feels much more appropriate. Obviously, the lens MUST have the possibility for manual focusing.
    - Ideally, the zoom would start BELOW 28mm.
    - This will not be my primary shooting lens, so I don't care for lenses that cost more than $200. These two can be had in the 100-150 range, in excellent condition.

    Thanks!
    Last edited by OldBodyOldSoul; 05-16-2011 at 11:46 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  2. #2
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,107
    If the Nikon and the Tamron were the same focal lengths, say 28mm to 105mm you would have trouble finding significant differences between them and the small differences would be hard for one to find. The quality of both companies is that high. That said, the longer the zoom range, the more compromises will be made on the length ==> short zoom length lenses are usually better than longer zoom length lenses. Still the differences are not all that great. I have a Nikon 20mm to 35mm zoom lens, a Nikon 28mm to 200mm zoom lens, and a Tamron 28mm to 300mm zoom lens. In the 28mm to 200mm range the Nikon 28mm to 300mm and Tamron 28mm to 300mm zoom lenses are indistiguishable when the same subject is photographed on the same camera body. In the 28mm to 35mm lens the Nikon 20mm to 35mm is clearly better. Again it has the shortest zoom lens.

    "I want it to work with both film and digital, so it must have the aperture ring. My cameras are FM2n, F3, F100 and D90." Photons are quite intelligent and generally well behaved and are able to behave correctly for film, digital and Daguerreotype.

    The question comes down to what works best for you? Since you stated "Ideally, the zoom would start BELOW 28mm." I would recommend the Tamron 24-135.

    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  3. #3
    Jeff L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Toronto ON
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    491
    I'm not a Nikon user, but for what it's worth, I've always been happy with my Tamron lenses.

  4. #4
    OldBodyOldSoul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    If the Nikon and the Tamron were the same focal lengths, say 28mm to 105mm you would have trouble finding significant differences between them and the small differences would be hard for one to find. The quality of both companies is that high. That said, the longer the zoom range, the more compromises will be made on the length ==> short zoom length lenses are usually better than longer zoom length lenses. Still the differences are not all that great. I have a Nikon 20mm to 35mm zoom lens, a Nikon 28mm to 200mm zoom lens, and a Tamron 28mm to 300mm zoom lens. In the 28mm to 200mm range the Nikon 28mm to 300mm and Tamron 28mm to 300mm zoom lenses are indistiguishable when the same subject is photographed on the same camera body. In the 28mm to 35mm lens the Nikon 20mm to 35mm is clearly better. Again it has the shortest zoom lens.
    Thanks Steve. I know that convenience usually/always goes on the account of quality, but was wondering how much and in what area for this particular case as zooms cover relatively similar range. You say that the difference would be (almost) indistinguishable, but does that statement come from your experience with these lenses, your general experience/knowledge or something else?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    "I want it to work with both film and digital, so it must have the aperture ring. My cameras are FM2n, F3, F100 and D90." Photons are quite intelligent and generally well behaved and are able to behave correctly for film, digital and Daguerreotype.
    I don't get your point, if there is one. What I said there is that, for example, G lenses are out of question.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    The question comes down to what works best for you? Since you stated "Ideally, the zoom would start BELOW 28mm." I would recommend the Tamron 24-135.

    Steve
    Yes, at the moment I am leaning towards the Tamron, for no other reason than that 24-28mm range and the fact that they are both well regarded.

  5. #5
    Ralph Javins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Latte Land, Washington
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    832
    Good morning;

    It took me a while to sort out this one. I think that the Tamron lens you mentioned is the Tamron Type 190D, SP AF24-135mm F/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical [IF] MACRO zoom lens. This is an Auto Focusing lens, and it does not have the ability to switch it from one camera to another just by changing the Tamron Adaptall-2 mount. It is built to be used on only one camera mount, and you must specify which single camera mount you want to put it on, and that will most likely be a Nikon mount in your case.

    Having said that, it is also fairly obvious that you really want the lens to go to less than 28mm, as indicated by your emphasis on "IDEALLY." The Nikon will not go down below 28mm and on to 24mm for you. I agree that 24mm is a very useful focal length.

    While I am not that familiar with the Nikon AF lens mount, I do know that the mechanical parts are compatible, in that you can use a manually focusing NIKKOR lens on an Auto Focusing Nikon Lens Mount, such as their DSLR bodies. I am just not sure about using an AF lens on an early manual focus camera body, such as the F3. I have never tried that. I have no similar problem in this realm with my Minolta cameras, because the MF mount and the AF mount are very different. I do have the similar Tamron Type 71D lens for my Minolta AF bodies.

    Anyway, from the two choices you listed, it would seem that you might prefer the Tamron 190D for Nikon AF mount. If both of the lenses you describe are in the same condition without any problems, you will not be disappointed. Having that 24mm wider focal length can be very useful.
    Enjoy;

    Ralph Javins, Latte Land, Washington

    When they ask you; "How many Mega Pixels you got in your camera?"
    just tell them; "I use activated silver bromide crystals tor my image storage media."

  6. #6
    OldBodyOldSoul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff L View Post
    I'm not a Nikon user, but for what it's worth, I've always been happy with my Tamron lenses.
    Jeff, thanks. I have a Tamron 17-50 for my D90 and I am more than happy with it, especially considering the price.
    However, every manufacturer has come up with some gems and some garbage and the whole spectrum in between, and I am trying to figure out where these two lenses fall, especially with respect to each other.

  7. #7
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,107
    Quote Originally Posted by OldBodyOldSoul View Post
    Thanks Steve. I know that convenience usually/always goes on the account of quality, but was wondering how much and in what area for this particular case as zooms cover relatively similar range. You say that the difference would be (almost) indistinguishable, but does that statement come from your experience with these lenses, your general experience/knowledge or something else?
    Both additionally studying optics at a small yellow box company that you probably never heard of ==> Eastman Kodak.

    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  8. #8
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,107
    Quote Originally Posted by OldBodyOldSoul View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    "I want it to work with both film and digital, so it must have the aperture ring. My cameras are FM2n, F3, F100 and D90." Photons are quite intelligent and generally well behaved and are able to behave correctly for film, digital and Daguerreotype.
    I don't get your point, if there is one. What I said there is that, for example, G lenses are out of question.
    Freely translated: A lens that will work for film camera will work for a digital camera.
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  9. #9
    OldBodyOldSoul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    190
    Thanks Ralph. Yes, that is the lens I am considering and, yes, I would be using it with my Nikon cameras.

    So long as the lens has the aperture ring it should work with any Nikon camera I have. Obviously it would not autofocus with FM2n and F3 since those are manual cameras, but would with F100 and (digital) D90. I don't know if there are AF lenses that you can't focus manually, which is why I listed that as one of the requirements (if somebody wishes to throw another lens in this pool of two).

    I may have put too much emphasis on 24mm by using capital letters there . I do have prime lenses that work for me (20, 28, 35, 50, 85, 105, 135, 180) but since I am looking for a do-it-all lens that would be convenient in situations when changing lenses is not the best option, it would be nice to have something lower than 28mm. However, I don't care for that extra range if it comes at a high price, image quality wise.
    That's why I posted my question, hoping there are people who have used both, or have a link to a place where such information exists.

    Thanks again.
    Last edited by OldBodyOldSoul; 05-16-2011 at 03:23 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: "don't want" replaced with "don't care for"

  10. #10
    OldBodyOldSoul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    190
    Steve, thanks for your reply.

    Actually, I was more concerned about the other way around - lenses that work on digital but might not work properly on my FM2n and F3, like G lenses that don't have the aperture ring. I like to change those things every once in a while

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin