Can I see some Pic's from 24-135mm Tamron

Member said:

I hope I don't miss your post.
Email me, if you can.

Click to expand...

Hello. I posted all of the details in a sep thread:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=4212836

Hope this helps!

--
Drew
http://www.pbase.com/lokerd
http://primerica.itgo.com/

David Burroughs said:

http://homepage.mac.com/daveburroughs/PhotoAlbum10.html

The sunset was taken with the 24-135 Tamaron. The UW stuff with the
60 mm Nikon.

Click to expand...

Did you REALLY spend $3,000 for that underwater housing?!

YIPES!

Brendan
--
If a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, I'm the world's most dangerous man!
Bunch of new photos at: http://www.pbase.com/bgetchel/root

Ben Herrmann said:

I realize I am babbling here, but can anyone imagine Nikon coming
out with one of their high end lens - let's say a constant f2.8
with a range of around 24 - 135. I realize that we're talking big
bucks here - especially if it's along the same quality lines as
their 17 - 35 f2.8 or their 80 - 200 f2.8. But I am just curious
as to why Nikon doesn't come out with a great all-around lens that
people could leave on their cameras for at least 90% of all photo
occasions. They always seem to put their R&D into either wide
angle zooms or telephoto zooms. Why not a great standard
all-purpose high-end zoom?

Click to expand...

Being the intrepid Group Idiot, I'll take a stab at this one.

First, both the Nikon 17-35 and 80-200 are roughly 2X multiple zooms (OK, 2.5x for the 80-200). A 24-135 is a 5X multiple, and such a wide range seems to present a huge problem in maintaining optical quality throughout the range. The real "purists" almost wouldn't even touch an Uber zoom like the vaunted AF-S 17-35/2.8 because it still isn't "good enough" opened up--and that's why they try to stick with primes where ever possible.

I just don't think the technology exists (maybe the physics don't, FTM) to make a zoom as sharp as a top-notch prime even in the low-range, much less asking them to do it with a wide range zoom--particularly maintaining sharpness at a fast aperture.

My real question is: Why is the Zeiss 300/2.8 prime $15,000? Is it really any better than either the Nikon or Canon? Also, it's MF only!

Brendan
--
If a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, I'm the world's most dangerous man!
Bunch of new photos at: http://www.pbase.com/bgetchel/root