The lens mystery (Tamron or Nikkor)

[chaminda.madawala]

Guys, i have heard Tamron lenses are producing low colors after couple year and that's why they cheaper than Nikkor lenses. Is that true?

I am trying to buy a 70-200mm F/2.8 lens and the Tamron one is so cheap than the Nikkor one. Help me on this

Tamron



Nikkor

[Cypher]

hey there,

Tamron are indeed cheaper than Nikon lenses. In the world of photography you generally get what you pay for. The glass quality of Nikon is better but that doesnt mean Tamron won't perform for your needs specifically. I myself tested a 90mm macro lens from Tamron and it was tack sharp at f8 - f11 a bit softer at f5,6 and downwards. If you get the chance perhaps try one out first ? Another factor is of course money. For most people (me included) you have to weigh price against how much you plan on using it. Pro's that work with cameras everyday want the best and fastest glass available, but if you are just getting into photography a Tamron is probably a better option. But I cant look into your wallet so I will leave that up to you.

I also have a review here for you:

Tamron SP AF 70-200mm Di LD (IF) Macro Lens Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review

http://www.dyxum.com/reviews/lenses/...asp?IDLens=381

Good luck

[CheaperKings]

That's sooo true! You do, indeed, get what pay for when it comes to camera gear! If you're looking around on ebay and see a lens on there for $20, it probably isn't worth the $20 they're asking for it...

[chaminda.madawala]

Originally Posted by Cypher

hey there,

Tamron are indeed cheaper than Nikon lenses. In the world of photography you generally get what you pay for. The glass quality of Nikon is better but that doesnt mean Tamron won't perform for your needs specifically. I myself tested a 90mm macro lens from Tamron and it was tack sharp at f8 - f11 a bit softer at f5,6 and downwards. If you get the chance perhaps try one out first ? Another factor is of course money. For most people (me included) you have to weigh price against how much you plan on using it. Pro's that work with cameras everyday want the best and fastest glass available, but if you are just getting into photography a Tamron is probably a better option. But I cant look into your wallet so I will leave that up to you.

I also have a review here for you:

Tamron SP AF 70-200mm Di LD (IF) Macro Lens Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review

Tamron*SP AF 70-200 F2.8 Di LD IF MACRO Reviews at Dyxum.com

Good luck

Thanks Cypher. i will check that review

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by chaminda.madawala

Guys, i have heard Tamron lenses are producing low colors after couple year

What does this mean?

Some Sigma lenses used to have colour casts, but that was from day 1.

[chaminda.madawala]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

What does this mean?

Some Sigma lenses used to have colour casts, but that was from day 1.

So you mean there isn't such problem ?

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by chaminda.madawala

So you mean there isn't such problem ?

I dont even know what the problem is! Your description of it is terrible.

Some Sigma lenses have colour casts. But its an effect that is ingrained in the lens: it doesnt just pop-up at one point. Its there from the beginning.

From what Ive heard, though, Tamrons dont. Of course, if COLOUR CASTS are not the issue, then my answer is of no use.

What do you mean by "producing low colours"