Is it me? Or the lens?

[bulldog413]

I had a beautiful zoom lens that popped an ap spring, so I had to replace the lens. I opted for a Tamron 28-75 1:2.8. I thought I liked the lens, but it seemed like seeing these pics blown up, I thought maybe it's me and my tremor.

Only today, I was shooting with my 50mm and no matter what I did, the 50mm always delivered a clear picture. I thought, "maybe I'm too far back and trying to use the zoom is creating shake." So I put it on a tripod and still, the eyes of my subject blurred.

Is it me? A crappy lens? technique?

I came home and my daughter was sitting on the couch and I made her pose from 5 feet away and then quickly switched from the Tamron 2.8 to the sony 50mm. Same thing. Tamron lens is not as crisp.... or is it me.

Please comment
Thanks.

[kencaleno]

what aperture were you shooting at?

Does lens have IS/VR function? if so was it off when using tripod?

[bulldog413]

I think I've tried a couple. I can't remember now what I shot at yesterday, but even this morning, 2 feet away (f2.8, 100-200 speeds) I got the same thing. I tried changing from spot to wide focus. Do you think it's the ap value that's doing this? If so, why would they make a 2.8 that doesn't focus? Looking forward to your wisdom...

[bulldog413]

as far as is/vr, I tried it both on and off the tripod. I've heard that I should turn it off on the tripod, which I didn't... but still didn't matter in hand. Should I sell this lens?

[OsmosisStudios]

What kind of shutter speeds are you using? And posting a 100% crop of a particularly glaring example will help us determine whether its focus or movement.

[Saralonde]

I have that Tamron and a 50mm. Being a prime and a 1.4, my 50 tends to be sharper, but I get nice shots with my Tamron.

As mentioned above, example shots might help.

[kencaleno]

Originally Posted by bulldog413

I think I've tried a couple. I can't remember now what I shot at yesterday, but even this morning, 2 feet away (f2.8, 100-200 speeds) I got the same thing. I tried changing from spot to wide focus. Do you think it's the ap value that's doing this? If so, why would they make a 2.8 that doesn't focus? Looking forward to your wisdom...

F5.6 would be your sharpest aperture on the tamron,and F2.8 on the F 1.4 prime lens-Ken

[bulldog413]

First of all, Thank you all 100x's for your help. All I want to do is be a great photographer and DPS and the forums are the best thing a new photog could ask for.

My concern is of course for reproduction, especially since I do a lot of actor headshots, so I'm concerned that an 8X10 reprod will be less then superior as I really strive to get life in the eyes of the client.

This is a link to the test shots I took yesterday. I didn't have time to play with speeds and aperture's as my model was fidgety. I also thought it best to shoot everything at the same spec.

It's very possible that it could be shake, but to answer a reply, the shots I had trouble with the other day (not posted) were done (attempted) on a tripod, to the same affect.

Looking forward to your reply's. Thanks again. Forever grateful,
Robb
(the first three shots are the test shots. Feel free to view other pictures, but it's the first three of my daughter that I posted for your examples. The fourth shot begins my other shots not intended for your advice, though I can say that it was done with the 50mm, but I know I did move and therefore not a great shot.
Flickr: bulldog413's Photostream

[bulldog413]

p.s. Maybe I'm being hyper critical.... I should also point out that in all these shots, I used spot focus and focused on the eyes...

[kencaleno]

I see nothing wrong with the focus-I wouldn't expect focus to be this good at fully open-Sweet spot for this lens would be F 5.6 at 30mm focal length-the only faults I could find are in lighting and composition-looks as though these were made under tungsten light,without tungsten white balance. Ken