Tamron SP AF 24-135mm f/3.5-5.6 AD IF for Nikon AF-D

I hesitated for some time, before pulling the trigger on this purchase. My mistake. I promptly burned two rolls of fine grained film with it, and the results are VERY good. Upon glassing the negs, (10x loupe on light table) I found the negs to be very sharp and defined. Great color & contrast. I used it on the F100 body, and had no issues with focusing. Quite fast. It's not too heavy or awkward. It very well, will probably become my "go to" auto-focus lens.

Quiet Light Photography

Well built & sharp.

A bit slow. f/3.5-5.6 But making it faster, would make it considerably more expensive.

Nikon 28-105

Not needed.

I bought this lens off ebay new (overstock). I was looking for a lens that could cover most ranges efficiently while keeping good quality through-out the zoom range. A perfect walk-around lens (without breaking the bank)

Yes i know we all want L lens quality for cheap. But truely i believe after numerous reviews, tests, my own tests, that this lens can compare very well to the Canon EF-S 28-135 USM. Your probably thinking ya right... Sorry to let you down. It does. Take out the IS from the Canon, and do a side-by-side test and you'll definately see that they both are very near to each other. If 10 tests were done they would both be close to each other. The Canon barely beating the Tamron lens in one and vice versa in another, and so on. It was back and forth between the two.

I have to give the Canon the edge due to its IS and USM features. But its cost... Thats the biggest negitive with it. The Tamron fell behind due to that and that alone. In another aspect, The tamron has an edge of its own. What is it you may ask... COST! Actualy, i rather call it value for your dollar. New, The Tamron lens is a whopping 1/2 price compared to the Canon 28-135 IS USM... Damn, 2 lenses for the price of one... With around 5-7% loss in quality compared to the Canon, better full wide range, on top of the fact its half the price of the Canon, very respectable build quality, and so on.

My only true example of what quality this lens puts out, would safely be "almost" identical to the Canon EF50mm F1.8 II prime. Sharpness was within 5% in most cases, saturation was exact also. Obviously the Tamron wont perform in low light like the EF50mm but were talking "n most normal situations for "amature/novice/casual" photographers. Although, this lens will satisfy a broader range than just that.

What can i say, I was always told to skip Tamron, and go for Sigma when it comes to 3rd party lenses. I honestly regret believing that as this lens proved me wrong. Its no L lens, and you shouldn't ever expect quality of that nature in a lower budget market range. Comparing any consumer lens to a L lens is ignorance and a waste of time. I see that all the time with reviews and laugh. People compare try to compare the Canon EF-S 18-55 (kit lens) to a Canon 17-40L.

Just get your camera, load yourself up in your car and drive to your local photography store. Try lenses out and go home and look for yourself. Dony just go by reivews, 75% of them are totaly biased to the reviewers preference, not yours. Dont take my word for it. But try this Tamron 24-135 for yourself, this lens is my new walk-around lens in general, and will be till it fails, breaks, or me keel over lol. Very good bang for the buck !!!

There are no 1/2 ratings so i gave it a 5, in the real world considering everything... I'd rate it overall a 4.5/5...

LOTS...

-sharpness
-natural color replication
-near perfect zoom range ( Tamrons 24 compared to the Canons 28 full wide )
-excellent build quality
-cost/value
-comes with a good lens hood

Some...

-Slightly slow auto focus (I got all the time in the world)
-its a little heavy, a bit unbalanced on my Canon 350XT
-zoom ring is smooth but a little firm

A variety of lenses... Not many L lenses though.