Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 slow AF annoyed you?

Started Aug 6, 2007 | Discussions
king_arthur
Junior MemberPosts: 41
Like?
Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 slow AF annoyed you?
Aug 6, 2007

Hi,

For those who read my other thread knew I am heavily considering this lens to replace my Kit. Loved the overall review, don't mind the range (Zoom & price) but two thing bugs me: slow AF and bad copies. The later I can only cross my finger. Do you have experience with this lens and it's slowness? I am taking pics of my baby girl in the house. Low light, no Flash, she moves a lot. I have 430EX but I need the camera to be ready ALL the time so external flash is not practical. That's the reason I pick this one over others (around the price). f/2.8 should be handy in the house.

Some people terms of "slow" are very different. Do you think I'll be affected for my purpose? Thanks for any comments and samples.

k.a

Angelo Jacinto
Forum MemberPosts: 81
Like?
Re: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 slow AF annoyed you?
In reply to king_arthur, Aug 7, 2007

Yes it has. That's why I upgraded to a 17-55 IS lens. USM made my life so much easier capturing moments.

The time I owned this lens, the AF-assist beam on my 580EX improved my keeper rate significantly. I would also close the f/stop to f/4-f/5.6 to give some more depth-of-field allowance. Do you have your AF-assist beam on? Try limiting the use of 2.8 to higher contrast lighting for better AF.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
slapshot66
Contributing MemberPosts: 711
Like?
Re: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 slow AF annoyed you?
In reply to king_arthur, Aug 7, 2007

yes, the AF is dog slow in my personal opinion, but at $300, it certainly cannot be an L lens, so there are going ot tbe shortcomings. You get what you pay for and what you get with this lens is an exceptional value. As I said, it isn't going to be the perfect lens, but it is going to offer you a mid-range f2.8 zoom that produces amazing image quality. I would buy it from a reputable dealer and try it out for a couple of days.

-- hide signature --

'Image is everything'
http://www.watsonfx.com
terry66.blogspot.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
thx1138
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,147
Like?
No, because it's not slow
In reply to king_arthur, Aug 7, 2007

king_arthur wrote:

Hi,

For those who read my other thread knew I am heavily considering this
lens to replace my Kit. Loved the overall review, don't mind the
range (Zoom & price) but two thing bugs me: slow AF and bad copies.
The later I can only cross my finger. Do you have experience with
this lens and it's slowness? I am taking pics of my baby girl in the
house. Low light, no Flash, she moves a lot. I have 430EX but I need
the camera to be ready ALL the time so external flash is not
practical. That's the reason I pick this one over others (around the
price). f/2.8 should be handy in the house.

Some people terms of "slow" are very different. Do you think I'll be
affected for my purpose? Thanks for any comments and samples.

k.a

Use a 1D II and it's decently quick. Not in the same class as L glass USM, but still good. And it's focusses in very low light, unlike my POS 50 f/1.8.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Staale S
Senior MemberPosts: 1,108
Like?
Re: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 slow AF annoyed you?
In reply to king_arthur, Aug 7, 2007

Indoors, no flash? Will even f/2.8 be bright enough, I wonder? In my experience this is decidedly borderline, though much depends on how much light you actually have turned on in your living-room of course. I'd seriously consider a fast prime such as a 50mm f/1.something or a 30mm f/1.4 for that use, it gives more meat for the autofocus to work with and of course lets in more light (at the cost of DOF of course).

I am very partial to an 85mm f/1.8 in this setting myself, on a 5D. Bump ISO to the max and one can get usable shots in candlelight with this combination. A 50 f/1.4 would be a close match on a crop body.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
zonoskar
Regular MemberPosts: 285Gear list
Like?
Re: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 slow AF annoyed you?
In reply to Staale S, Aug 7, 2007

Staale S wrote:

Indoors, no flash? Will even f/2.8 be bright enough, I wonder? In my
experience this is decidedly borderline, though much depends on how
much light you actually have turned on in your living-room of course.

True.

I'd seriously consider a fast prime such as a 50mm f/1.something or a
30mm f/1.4 for that use, it gives more meat for the autofocus to work
with and of course lets in more light (at the cost of DOF of course).

If f2.8 is not enough, I doubt that f1.4 will be either. Besides, the DOF will be soo shallow that it's barely usable. I have the 30mm f1.4 and at f1.4 a persons eye is in focus, but not their nose (and it does not have to be a big nose).

I find the focus speed of the Tamron to be comparable (slightly faster) to the 17-70mm Sigma. Not fast, but certainly not dog-slow. I'm using them on a 30D, the 17-70 will be sold in the near future.

One funny thing I noticed is that when you try to focus below MFD, de lens starts oscillating, very annoying...

-- hide signature --

Hi

 zonoskar's gear list:zonoskar's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS M Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Staale S
Senior MemberPosts: 1,108
Like?
Re: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 slow AF annoyed you?
In reply to zonoskar, Aug 7, 2007

I prefer a longer focal length prime (85mm) for low-light, precisely because of the shallow DOF wide open. It is easier to get a meaningful photo when there is 1 person in the frame than when there is three or four - and only enough DOF to get one of them sharp. I have a 50 mm f/1.4 but it just does not work for me as a low-light lens on full-frame; too wide. This is purely down to incompetence on my part of course

As for exposure, keep in mind that an f/1.4 lets in three times more light than an f/2.8 wide open, it is a huge difference! Even an f/2.0 lets in twice as much as the fastest available zoom. It's just a matter of adapting your shooting to work with the DOF really.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
fpsstudio
Forum MemberPosts: 62
Like?
Re: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 slow AF annoyed you?
In reply to king_arthur, Aug 7, 2007

Maybe look at the Tamron 17-50 2.8. It focuses quicker (but louder) than the 28-75 and is very sharp. I have both and both focus fine for me and I do weddings in low light churches. But a 50 or 35 1.4 at iso 1600 can get you out of a very dark situation with a nice pic.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dylanbarnhart
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,268Gear list
Like?
annoyed, but useful
In reply to king_arthur, Aug 7, 2007

I have the Tamron 28-75, and a very active toddler at home. The focus speed of the Tamron definitely annoys me, perhaps becaused I'm used to the quick AF of the Canon 85mm F1.8

Anyways, it's not as bad as you'd think. The speed is enough for most situations. The worst is when the baby runs directly toward you, and you'll miss that shot. No big deal. There are plenty of other angles to have fun with.

A couple tips:

1. In my living room. F2.8 only allows shutter of 1/30, even at ISO1600. So F2.8 isn't not fast enough for flashless shooting, as someone else has mentioned.

2. Using the flash assist infrared light from the external flash will vastly improve focus speed in low light. If you don't want the flash light look, just add (-FEC) negative flash exposure compensation, or cover it up with a thick piece of paper.

 dylanbarnhart's gear list:dylanbarnhart's gear list
Canon PowerShot G2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Canon EOS 50D Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
chowy
Contributing MemberPosts: 631
Like?
Re: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 slow AF annoyed you?
In reply to Staale S, Aug 7, 2007

Staale S wrote:

As for exposure, keep in mind that an f/1.4 lets in three times more
light than an f/2.8 wide open, it is a huge difference! Even an f/2.0
lets in twice as much as the fastest available zoom. It's just a
matter of adapting your shooting to work with the DOF really.

It's 4 times more light you get with f1.4 than f2.8.

-- hide signature --

5D~35L~50/1.4~85L~85/1.8~135L~Kenko x1.4~G7

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Staale S
Senior MemberPosts: 1,108
Like?
Re: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 slow AF annoyed you?
In reply to chowy, Aug 7, 2007

Of course! My bad.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mike Scott
Senior MemberPosts: 1,064
Like?
Re: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 slow AF annoyed you?
In reply to king_arthur, Aug 7, 2007

It's good if you are shooting in good light. Where it dogs is in low light. I use one at home and have no problems with the AF. I needed to use it this past weekend in a pinch for a Wedding and it hunted so bad at the reception that I gave it up and switched to a prime.

Mike

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
andreas_d
Contributing MemberPosts: 588
Like?
Re: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 slow AF annoyed you?
In reply to king_arthur, Aug 7, 2007

No, because it's not that slow. I never missed a moment because of it, but again I don't shoot sports. If shooting children is what's it's for, I don't think you'll miss anything, just my 2 cents.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
shoful
Regular MemberPosts: 353Gear list
Like?
Re: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 slow AF annoyed you?
In reply to andreas_d, Aug 7, 2007

In low light it hunts a lot.

But I use it in my studio along with other Canon lenes and I can tell you from experience it's a fabulous lens equil to the Canon 24-70 in sharpness.
The problem is that you need some good light to get the Auto
focus working properly.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ryan Li
Senior MemberPosts: 1,111
Like?
Yes
In reply to king_arthur, Aug 7, 2007

king_arthur wrote:

Hi,

For those who read my other thread knew I am heavily considering this
lens to replace my Kit. Loved the overall review, don't mind the
range (Zoom & price) but two thing bugs me: slow AF and bad copies.
The later I can only cross my finger. Do you have experience with
this lens and it's slowness? I am taking pics of my baby girl in the
house. Low light, no Flash, she moves a lot. I have 430EX but I need
the camera to be ready ALL the time so external flash is not
practical. That's the reason I pick this one over others (around the
price). f/2.8 should be handy in the house.

Some people terms of "slow" are very different. Do you think I'll be
affected for my purpose? Thanks for any comments and samples.

Never shot toddlers, but I used to attempt photographing indoor basketball with the 28-75, and gave up very quickly as the focus speed of the Tamron just couldn't keep up. Does your baby girl move that fast? For everything else, I found the Tamron to be an excellent lens. I eventually sold it though when I got a 24-105 IS, as I desired 24mm, IS and the much faster focusing.

Although I agree with another poster, F/2.8 isn't really very fast (in aperture terms) for indoor use. F/1.8 or even F/1.4 would give you much better shutter speeds to work with without having to pump up ISO to 800 or even 1600.

Cheers
Ryan

-- hide signature --

Ryan Li / Travel and wedding photographer
I collect romantic tales.

ActionAid charity print sale - http://ryan.li/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vernon D Rainwater
Forum ProPosts: 11,841
Like?
Re: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 slow AF annoyed you?
In reply to king_arthur, Aug 8, 2007

king_arthur wrote:

Hi,

For those who read my other thread knew I am heavily considering this
lens to replace my Kit. Loved the overall review, don't mind the
range (Zoom & price) but two thing bugs me: slow AF and bad copies.
The later I can only cross my finger. Do you have experience with
this lens and it's slowness? I am taking pics of my baby girl in the
house. Low light, no Flash, she moves a lot. I have 430EX but I need
the camera to be ready ALL the time so external flash is not
practical. That's the reason I pick this one over others (around the
price). f/2.8 should be handy in the house.

Some people terms of "slow" are very different. Do you think I'll be
affected for my purpose? Thanks for any comments and samples.

k.a

You seem to think that "slow focus" would be the primary problem. In normal "Home Lighting" you may be expecting entirely too much (for any 2.8 lens) to do a good job especially with exposures and of course with focusing.

I expect the focusing will be BETTER than the exposures will be for that type of available lighting, without using flash.

I have the mentioned lens and have absolutely NO problems with auto Focusing for exposures of my two Great Grand Daughters which are F a s t, however; I use an external flash for the best exposures and rarely a bad image due to focusing or exposure. Very rarely do I use the 2.8 zoom in normal home lighting -- especially with fast moving subjects.

If you want to be ready at all times and** NOT use flash, then use a lens with a "wider f:stop" but you will get much better images with proper lighting.

Before the "crowds" scream about having exposed good images in normal home lighting with 2.8 lens, there would be many more that could confirm (based on actual experience) that 2.8 is NOT the best for this situation
--
Vernon...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vernon D Rainwater
Forum ProPosts: 11,841
Like?
Re: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 slow AF annoyed you?
In reply to king_arthur, Aug 8, 2007

king_arthur wrote:

Hi,

For those who read my other thread knew I am heavily considering this
lens to replace my Kit. Loved the overall review, don't mind the
range (Zoom & price) but two thing bugs me: slow AF and bad copies.
The later I can only cross my finger. Do you have experience with
this lens and it's slowness? I am taking pics of my baby girl in the
house. Low light, no Flash,
she moves a lot.

Your above last line is the primary reason that you would be wise to get a few extra batteries for your External Flash and use it with a properly working Tamron 28-75 lens which will be ideal, in my opinion -- based on my last 19 months usage of the same lens.

The normal home lighting is NOT ideal for exposing moving subjects (without flash) using a 2.8 lens -- and, there usually may be a depth of field problem if a lens with a wider f:stop is used.

I have 430EX but I need
the camera to be ready ALL the time so external flash is not
practical. That's the reason I pick this one over others (around the
price). f/2.8 should be handy in the house.

Some people terms of "slow" are very different. Do you think I'll be
affected for my purpose? Thanks for any comments and samples.

k.a

-- hide signature --

Vernon...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
king_arthur
Junior MemberPosts: 41
Like?
So do you think 17-50 is better option?
In reply to Vernon D Rainwater, Aug 8, 2007

Thanks very much for your inputs....

Slow AF is not my main concern. My Kit lens soft images in this condition (and slow focus, and IQ) is my main problem (And I don't expect too much from this lens). My goal is to replace my Kit lens with something descent. Not great. Descent. I don't expect to spend $300 and fix ALL my problems, I just try to get the best alternative for my situation. I probably still get the lens, or 17-50, maybe. So those comments are appreciated greatly. I think I'll be comfortable with 28-75 range, but if 17-50 does the AF faster I'll go for it.

I'd love to get 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM but having no experience in purchasing an extra lens before I don't think it's a wise move.

I'm Also getting 50mm f/1.8 for sure. For most indoor stuff I heard (and hope) I can rely on this horse but I still need a zoom lens for my primary lens. Maybe anyone know something better around the $$$?

Thank you again. It has been really useful replies for me.

k.a

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vernon D Rainwater
Forum ProPosts: 11,841
Like?
Re: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 slow AF annoyed you?
In reply to fpsstudio, Aug 8, 2007

fpsstudio wrote:

Maybe look at the Tamron 17-50 2.8. It focuses quicker (but louder)
than the 28-75 and is very sharp. I have both and both focus fine
for me and I do weddings in low light churches. But a 50 or 35 1.4
at iso 1600 can get you out of a very dark situation with a nice pic.

Have you used (or tested) your Tamron 17-50 2.8 lens at 17mm wide angle, using 2.8, 3.2, 3.5, 4.0, and 4.5; for focus accuracy as well as depth of field (total in focus area) being correct. Mine has severe front focus as well as front depth of field.

My new 17-50 has been to Tamron Service (4) four times over the past 10 weeks (sent 1st time the day after bought new) and continues to be VERY bad relating to this problem.
I have the 28-75 2.8 and no problems since bought new 19 months ago.
--
Vernon...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RedFox88
Forum ProPosts: 21,597
Like?
might not be the lens for you.
In reply to king_arthur, Aug 8, 2007

Indoor flashless of a small child? My tamron 28-75 does not focus that well in low light. You might look at the 85 f1.8 or 100 f2 instead. You'll get 1 to 1 1/3 stop faster lens with a bit better focusing and of course the great sharpness of a prime.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads