Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

Started Feb 28, 2017 | User reviews
sirhawkeye64 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,499
Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version
1

Overall, this is a decent alternative to the NIkon alternative, that costs almost twice as much.

Just make sure that you get a good copy, as I had to exchange mine once as the first one had some inconsistencies in the image quality.  The replacement works fine as it should.  Perhaps the biggest plus side to the Tamron version of the lens is that you get VC, which can be helpful in low-light, which is where I tend to use mine quite a bit (for example, doing low-light street photography or photography at night in large cities where I can capture some great wide angle shots).

The lens is a bit heavy, but not really that much different than the Nikon version (i've shot bot the Nikon version and the one I have and from a weight standpoint, they feel about the same to me--the Nikon does feel a bit more heavy-duty and the Tamron feels a lilttle more plastic-y feeling but it does the job regardless.

I'm going to give this one a 4.5/5, but mainly because of Tamron's QC... variation within a lens line.  If their variation was a bit smaller, then I'd be more inclined to give it a full 5 stars, so my -0.5 stars is more  to the QC of Tamron than the lens itself.  (I have other fellow photographers that have run into similar issues with their Tamron lenses--some requiring exchanges) so the lens itself is fine, but the company needs to tighten up copy variations within lens lines.

 sirhawkeye64's gear list:sirhawkeye64's gear list
Nikon Z7 Nikon Z6 GoPro Hero7 Black GoPro Hero8 Black Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 +12 more
Tamron SP 15-30mm F/2.8 Di VC USD
Wideangle zoom lens • Canon EF, Nikon F (FX), Sony/Minolta Alpha DT • A012
Announced: Sep 12, 2014
sirhawkeye64's score
4.5
Average community score
4.6
wassim al malak Contributing Member • Posts: 670
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

hello ,

what are the inconsistent image quality problems you faced ?

i've also some problems with my copie .

 wassim al malak's gear list:wassim al malak's gear list
Nikon D3 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF Nikkor 105mm f/2D DC +2 more
OP sirhawkeye64 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,499
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

wassim al malak wrote:

hello ,

what are the inconsistent image quality problems you faced ?

i've also some problems with my copie .

The biggest was focusing. I had the focus motor crap out on one, within a few months. The second, I think it had to do with lighting across the frame, ie. not even lighting across the frame, even when photographing a wall that was evenly lit on all the way across.

But luckily my third copy is fine, and has been working fine without any issues, knock on wood. I just heard that Tamron's QC isn't the best, but for the price, it's still worth considering.

Luckily they covered mine under warranty (i think I may have had to pay shipping to get it in, but that was only a few bucks each time).  I've heard some horror stories, though, about Tamron service... there was one guy on here who claims that Tamron may have messed up his lens when sent it in for service (claims that it was back focusing when he got it back from the factory).

 sirhawkeye64's gear list:sirhawkeye64's gear list
Nikon Z7 Nikon Z6 GoPro Hero7 Black GoPro Hero8 Black Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 +12 more
wassim al malak Contributing Member • Posts: 670
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

happy for you to have a good copy

mine , has no lighting prob. , but it always miss focus on AF-C even on slow walking subject , and the big problem was that it needs 0 AF fine at 15mm and +20 at 30mm doesn't make it in focus , at 30mm still strongly front focus even at +20 .

i send it to tamron - australia , still several weeks , and they return it with the same issue , i'm gonna re-send it to them and tell them to replace it .

i'm  disappointed with it , i bought it based on all positives reviews from matt granger , angryphotographer and others , but now i wish i bought a used nikkor 14-24 f2.8g beside of it .

 wassim al malak's gear list:wassim al malak's gear list
Nikon D3 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF Nikkor 105mm f/2D DC +2 more
OP sirhawkeye64 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,499
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

wassim al malak wrote:

happy for you to have a good copy

mine , has no lighting prob. , but it always miss focus on AF-C even on slow walking subject , and the big problem was that it needs 0 AF fine at 15mm and +20 at 30mm doesn't make it in focus , at 30mm still strongly front focus even at +20 .

i send it to tamron - australia , still several weeks , and they return it with the same issue , i'm gonna re-send it to them and tell them to replace it .

i'm disappointed with it , i bought it based on all positives reviews from matt granger , angryphotographer and others , but now i wish i bought a used nikkor 14-24 f2.8g beside of it .

Yes it seems their QC isn't that great.  I've still got some sharpness concerns with mine, so mine may be going up for sale when I feel like spending the extra cash and just get the Nikon version, which i"ve rented before and loved, but couldn't spend the $2000+ at the time (that's why I got the Tamron).

 sirhawkeye64's gear list:sirhawkeye64's gear list
Nikon Z7 Nikon Z6 GoPro Hero7 Black GoPro Hero8 Black Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 +12 more
wassim al malak Contributing Member • Posts: 670
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version
1

for me , after buyng the sigma 35 f1.4 A and the tamron 15-30 f2.8 vc , i now feel more pleased shooting nikon lenses , i've enougth problems with them , i spend lot of money and time .

i'm now regretting buying the tamron , i sacrifice the heavy weight of it on my D3 and 1300 usd to satisfy myself , but now , i'm so sad .

 wassim al malak's gear list:wassim al malak's gear list
Nikon D3 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF Nikkor 105mm f/2D DC +2 more
OP sirhawkeye64 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,499
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

wassim al malak wrote:

for me , after buyng the sigma 35 f1.4 A and the tamron 15-30 f2.8 vc , i now feel more pleased shooting nikon lenses , i've enougth problems with them , i spend lot of money and time .

i'm now regretting buying the tamron , i sacrifice the heavy weight of it on my D3 and 1300 usd to satisfy myself , but now , i'm so sad .

I did hear one "horror" story from the guy at the local Nikon shop, that told me he had one of their 70-200, only to have it literally come apart (ie. break in half), and Tamron said they wouldn't warrant it because they considered it abused. For all I know he was making th story up, but I wasn't in the market to buy any lenses---we were just talking about Tamron vs. Nikon in general. I guess there is always that 1% or 2% that seem to slip past QC in fail big time, but this can happen to anyone: Tamron, Nikon, Canon, etc.

Like I said, I'm going to keep mine for now. Maybe tax time next year I'll consider "upgrading" to the Nikon, but I also don't use mine all that much (maybe once or twice a month, since most of my work in my photography groups has been on things like models and architecture, where I may not always need a wide angle).

All in all, I think if people get a good copy, which seems to be 1/3 (from my experience, and those of others I've read about online) then you're fine.  I wouldn't trust them to pro work, but for the enthusiast or hobbyist, they're fine, especially given the price/performance ratio (I see it as 80-90% of the Nikon version, for about 60% of the price).  You do get what you pay for, and sometimes, you get the "steal" where you find a cheap lens that serves you and gives you great images for a long time.

 sirhawkeye64's gear list:sirhawkeye64's gear list
Nikon Z7 Nikon Z6 GoPro Hero7 Black GoPro Hero8 Black Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 +12 more
Stian Olaisen
Stian Olaisen Regular Member • Posts: 322
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

I've had 2 copies of the 14-24, I also have a 16-35 and one 15-30.

Both 14-24 was better in the corners at 2.8, but only when you pixelpeep.

The nikon flared way to much (it even flared when the sun was behind me in one of the sides!), so I prefer the 15-30. The 14-24 was also better for astro but thats it. As a one for everything lens the 15-30 are the best there is now. The 16-35 I have flares a little less and takes 77mm filters so I prefer that in the sun, even though the 15-30 are good there too

 Stian Olaisen's gear list:Stian Olaisen's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Sigma 85mm F1.4 EX DG HSM Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G +3 more
wassim al malak Contributing Member • Posts: 670
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

seems like that is the truth .

even the nikon 105 f2 DC i recently bought it "new" , i find a black paint point in the inner elements , and now it's on the way to the retailer .

that's really very annoying , why those companies don't have a perfect QC ?

 wassim al malak's gear list:wassim al malak's gear list
Nikon D3 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF Nikkor 105mm f/2D DC +2 more
OP sirhawkeye64 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,499
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

Stian Olaisen wrote:

I've had 2 copies of the 14-24, I also have a 16-35 and one 15-30.

Both 14-24 was better in the corners at 2.8, but only when you pixelpeep.

The nikon flared way to much (it even flared when the sun was behind me in one of the sides!), so I prefer the 15-30. The 14-24 was also better for astro but thats it. As a one for everything lens the 15-30 are the best there is now. The 16-35 I have flares a little less and takes 77mm filters so I prefer that in the sun, even though the 15-30 are good there too

I still have my 15-30, and was thinking over the weekend that since I don't use it as much as my other lenses, I'll probably just keep it rather than upgrading to a Nikon.  If and when the Tamron kicks the bucket, then I'll consider the NIkon for the next time around.  For now, though, I don't notice much of an issue with mine.  Yeah, the sharpness could be better (I did compare it to a Nikon side by side a few months back before going on vacation) but given the price (and that I now have a "good" copy) I think I'm going to just keep it for the time being.  It's not a bad lens, it just has some room for improvement (optically).  I do like the VC, though, which the NIkon doesn't have VR.

 sirhawkeye64's gear list:sirhawkeye64's gear list
Nikon Z7 Nikon Z6 GoPro Hero7 Black GoPro Hero8 Black Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 +12 more
xiao_xiang Forum Member • Posts: 67
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

Overall, I am very pleased with this lens.

The f2.8 gives great performance in low light, especially with VC. I agree with another poster that it is great for evening street photography. Took it out again a couple of nights ago and have some very nice shots.

The reviews match up well with my experience. Great sharpness, softer at 30mm. Heavy, but manageable.

I couldn't justify the cost of the Nikon 12-24mm, so this is the best balance of performance/price/quality for me.

Next purchase -  Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 G2. Where I am, it's 20% cheaper than the Nikon f4 version.

My experience, Nikon lenses (I have 3) are "OK" except for the trinity lenses which reach superb (maybe the new primes too). Otherwise, unless you are a paranoid pro, these new Sigma's and Tamron's seem better build quality, image quality, for the price.

 xiao_xiang's gear list:xiao_xiang's gear list
Nikon D3300 Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG Macro +4 more
OP sirhawkeye64 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,499
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

xiao_xiang wrote:

Overall, I am very pleased with this lens.

The f2.8 gives great performance in low light, especially with VC. I agree with another poster that it is great for evening street photography. Took it out again a couple of nights ago and have some very nice shots.

The reviews match up well with my experience. Great sharpness, softer at 30mm. Heavy, but manageable.

I couldn't justify the cost of the Nikon 12-24mm, so this is the best balance of performance/price/quality for me.

Next purchase - Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 G2. Where I am, it's 20% cheaper than the Nikon f4 version.

My experience, Nikon lenses (I have 3) are "OK" except for the trinity lenses which reach superb (maybe the new primes too). Otherwise, unless you are a paranoid pro, these new Sigma's and Tamron's seem better build quality, image quality, for the price.

I wouldn't necessarily say better "Build" quality, because usually (not always) price is a good indication of build quality.  Again, this isn't always the case.  I'd say for the money you pay for the Sigma or Tamron, you're getting almost 90% of the performance and maybe 70% durability you'd expect from the Nikon (when I had the NIkon 14-24 that felt like a tank... granted the 15-30 is heavy, it still feels a bit plasticy).  And as far as IQ, I'd say they are about on par, not necessarily better in terms of sharpness.  For example, the 24-70 f/2.8 Tamron is sharp, but really only at 24mm.  Beyond that things start getting soft, especially in the corners.  The Nikon from the time when I had rented it, I found it stayed relatively sharp throughout most of the focal range, or at least up to around 50mm.  Now the NIkon 24-70 is very sharp in the center, and less sharp once you start moving out from there, but Nikon "fixed" this in the E version, where the softened the center a tad, but you gain more corner and mid sharpness across the same range, so they took some of the center sharpness and spread it around so that you could get a more evenly "sharp" photo I guess is the way to say it.

 sirhawkeye64's gear list:sirhawkeye64's gear list
Nikon Z7 Nikon Z6 GoPro Hero7 Black GoPro Hero8 Black Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 +12 more
xiao_xiang Forum Member • Posts: 67
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

I would agree with what you said.

The only point I was trying to make which wasn't clear, is that people often don't make a fair comparison. A Nikon 50mm f1.x has a very plastic feel, whereas a sigma art feels like a tank, and far, far more solid and therefore durable if we use this sense as an indicator of "quality".

Also, without statistical evidence, claims of superior quality are anecdotal and/or hearsay. No reason to doubt it, based on "plastic feel", but we all should be careful in the strength of our convictions. (Not you, others)

As an enthusiast, with a family, the high end Nikons cannot be seriously considered. The Tamron is the high performance, value option.

Buying the Nikon 12-24, to me, makes as much sense as buying medium format digital, chasing the elusive 10%.

I would target go crazy and buy a mythical 72mp new Nikon body.... LOL

 xiao_xiang's gear list:xiao_xiang's gear list
Nikon D3300 Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG Macro +4 more
OP sirhawkeye64 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,499
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

xiao_xiang wrote:

I would agree with what you said.

The only point I was trying to make which wasn't clear, is that people often don't make a fair comparison. A Nikon 50mm f1.x has a very plastic feel, whereas a sigma art feels like a tank, and far, far more solid and therefore durable if we use this sense as an indicator of "quality".

Also, without statistical evidence, claims of superior quality are anecdotal and/or hearsay. No reason to doubt it, based on "plastic feel", but we all should be careful in the strength of our convictions. (Not you, others)

As an enthusiast, with a family, the high end Nikons cannot be seriously considered. The Tamron is the high performance, value option.

Buying the Nikon 12-24, to me, makes as much sense as buying medium format digital, chasing the elusive 10%.

I would target go crazy and buy a mythical 72mp new Nikon body.... LOL

I agree with you on the cost concerns.   I'm in the same boat, and find myself having to compromise a bit when it comes to some lenses.  But I think that in reality, for the hobbyist, it doesn't always make sense to go overboard or break the bank because some lens that maybe costs 2x as much, might only be slightly sharper than a lens that costs 60% of the price.

 sirhawkeye64's gear list:sirhawkeye64's gear list
Nikon Z7 Nikon Z6 GoPro Hero7 Black GoPro Hero8 Black Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 +12 more
xiao_xiang Forum Member • Posts: 67
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

sirhawkeye64 wrote:

xiao_xiang wrote:

I would agree with what you said.

The only point I was trying to make which wasn't clear, is that people often don't make a fair comparison. A Nikon 50mm f1.x has a very plastic feel, whereas a sigma art feels like a tank, and far, far more solid and therefore durable if we use this sense as an indicator of "quality".

Also, without statistical evidence, claims of superior quality are anecdotal and/or hearsay. No reason to doubt it, based on "plastic feel", but we all should be careful in the strength of our convictions. (Not you, others)

As an enthusiast, with a family, the high end Nikons cannot be seriously considered. The Tamron is the high performance, value option.

Buying the Nikon 12-24, to me, makes as much sense as buying medium format digital, chasing the elusive 10%.

I would target go crazy and buy a mythical 72mp new Nikon body.... LOL

I agree with you on the cost concerns. I'm in the same boat, and find myself having to compromise a bit when it comes to some lenses. But I think that in reality, for the hobbyist, it doesn't always make sense to go overboard or break the bank because some lens that maybe costs 2x as much, might only be slightly sharper than a lens that costs 60% of the price.

Completely agree.

I have seen people with a Nikon D700 and a Nikon 70-200'm vrii on the front. That's his only body.

Bleeding edge is called that for a reason!

For me, I would probably be much better off spending my time and money shooting and learning than fussing over the "best" lens.....

 xiao_xiang's gear list:xiao_xiang's gear list
Nikon D3300 Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG Macro +4 more
OP sirhawkeye64 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,499
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

xiao_xiang wrote:

sirhawkeye64 wrote:

xiao_xiang wrote:

I would agree with what you said.

The only point I was trying to make which wasn't clear, is that people often don't make a fair comparison. A Nikon 50mm f1.x has a very plastic feel, whereas a sigma art feels like a tank, and far, far more solid and therefore durable if we use this sense as an indicator of "quality".

Also, without statistical evidence, claims of superior quality are anecdotal and/or hearsay. No reason to doubt it, based on "plastic feel", but we all should be careful in the strength of our convictions. (Not you, others)

As an enthusiast, with a family, the high end Nikons cannot be seriously considered. The Tamron is the high performance, value option.

Buying the Nikon 12-24, to me, makes as much sense as buying medium format digital, chasing the elusive 10%.

I would target go crazy and buy a mythical 72mp new Nikon body.... LOL

I agree with you on the cost concerns. I'm in the same boat, and find myself having to compromise a bit when it comes to some lenses. But I think that in reality, for the hobbyist, it doesn't always make sense to go overboard or break the bank because some lens that maybe costs 2x as much, might only be slightly sharper than a lens that costs 60% of the price.

Completely agree.

I have seen people with a Nikon D700 and a Nikon 70-200'm vrii on the front. That's his only body.

Bleeding edge is called that for a reason!

For me, I would probably be much better off spending my time and money shooting and learning than fussing over the "best" lens.....

Yep.... for me, maybe at the point (sometime in the future) when I'm actually being paid to shoot (ie. weddings, events, etc) then I'll consider the "best" lenses out there as I will have an income that can justify such a purchase.  But for now, for me, it's just a hobby, and while I want to get the best IQ I can out a lens, there's a balancing act between cost and performance.

 sirhawkeye64's gear list:sirhawkeye64's gear list
Nikon Z7 Nikon Z6 GoPro Hero7 Black GoPro Hero8 Black Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 +12 more
mrgs1
mrgs1 Senior Member • Posts: 1,843
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

xiao_xiang wrote:

I would agree with what you said.

The only point I was trying to make which wasn't clear, is that people often don't make a fair comparison. A Nikon 50mm f1.x has a very plastic feel, whereas a sigma art feels like a tank, and far, far more solid and therefore durable if we use this sense as an indicator of "quality".

Also, without statistical evidence, claims of superior quality are anecdotal and/or hearsay. No reason to doubt it, based on "plastic feel", but we all should be careful in the strength of our convictions. (Not you, others)

As an enthusiast, with a family, the high end Nikons cannot be seriously considered. The Tamron is the high performance, value option.

Buying the Nikon 12-24, to me, makes as much sense as buying medium format digital, chasing the elusive 10%.

I would target go crazy and buy a mythical 72mp new Nikon body.... LOL

Isn't 12-24mm Dx only and not that expensive? 14-24mm 2=8 is Fx.

 mrgs1's gear list:mrgs1's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon D3S Nikon D600 Nikon D4S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm F4G ED VR +9 more
OP sirhawkeye64 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,499
Re: Overall a Decent alternative to the Nikon Version

mrgs1 wrote:

xiao_xiang wrote:

I would agree with what you said.

The only point I was trying to make which wasn't clear, is that people often don't make a fair comparison. A Nikon 50mm f1.x has a very plastic feel, whereas a sigma art feels like a tank, and far, far more solid and therefore durable if we use this sense as an indicator of "quality".

Also, without statistical evidence, claims of superior quality are anecdotal and/or hearsay. No reason to doubt it, based on "plastic feel", but we all should be careful in the strength of our convictions. (Not you, others)

As an enthusiast, with a family, the high end Nikons cannot be seriously considered. The Tamron is the high performance, value option.

Buying the Nikon 12-24, to me, makes as much sense as buying medium format digital, chasing the elusive 10%.

I would target go crazy and buy a mythical 72mp new Nikon body.... LOL

Isn't 12-24mm Dx only and not that expensive? 14-24mm 2=8 is Fx.

If you're referring to Nikon branded lenses, yes, I think the DX equivalent (closet one to the 14-24 for FX) is the 12-24, and yes it is cheaper (most DX lenses are cheaper anyway compared to FX lenses).

@xiao_xiang:  I agree that OEM Nikon lenses are pricey, but you shouldn't automatically be dismissed, as some of the "higher end" (high end, in terms of quality) aren't always expense.  Such as the 85mm portrait lens, can be had for a reasonable price, and performs very well, yet is considered a higher-end portrait lens, compared to a cheap 50mm f/1.8 NIkon.  So there are some good high(er)-end lenses from Nikon that won't break the bank.  Now the lenses found in the trilogy (14-24, 24-70, 70-200) are priced a bit high, but they are considered premium glass by most people (pros and hobbyists).  Nikon also has some other options, for example, I wanted to get a 70-200mm and originally had my sights set on the f/2.8, but may consider the f/4 version as it's about $400 less, gives excellent image quality, and since I do mostly landscapes, the f/4 being the largest aperture available on that lens, is fine for my needs.  The best part is the f/4 gives you excellent IQ for about $1300 vs about $1700.

So, you can find some good alternatives, even for OEM glass, and especially if you look at used, you can find some really good deals on used (good condition) glass, sometimes saving as much as 30-50%, depending on its level of use and age.

 sirhawkeye64's gear list:sirhawkeye64's gear list
Nikon Z7 Nikon Z6 GoPro Hero7 Black GoPro Hero8 Black Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 +12 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads