Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Tamron 28-75 f/2.8

Recommended Posts

For under 300 USD, this lens is amazing. I get about equal or better IQ than the 450 dollar e-mount kit lens and 2 additional stops of light at the long end (about 1 and 2/3 at the wide end). It's a screw drive a-mount, which I have an LA-EA4 adapter for in the mail tomorrow. It's currently MF only on an LA-EA3 on my a7ii, much much lighter and way sharper than my Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 (which I paid 500 for), and I'm just hoping the AF is going to be good enough to take it to a wedding I have on Saturday.


If anyone is interested, I can post some comparison pics. It would also be a good opportunity to test out a new softbox (80cm x 80cm square gridded).

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many 28-70 were great. Also 28-105. It seems

as if the push to get 24 on the wide end was a

fall from grace for midrange zooms. You got 5

extra mm on the long end, where it's harmless.  

With such a lens, using the SLT AF adapter, I

strongly recommend using the AF Microadjust

feature. It's usually worth it !  





I have a Tokina ATX 28-70/2.8, reputed to be

the least desirable of old fast midranges. If my

lens is [pun alert!] the bottom of the barrel, the

better ones must all be quite terrific. FWIW my

"least desirable" member of the tribe happens

to also be the smallest .... I find that desirable.  


I posted about it, with pix, earlier in this forum: 



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are the tests between the kit, Sigma, and Tamron that I have. It's pretty unscientific, but I think the results are fairly clear.


Sony FE SEL2870 (kit lens) @ 70mm f/5.6



Sony 100% crop



Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM @ 70mm f/5.6



Sigma 100% crop




Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD @ 75mm f/5.6



Tamron 100% crop




Conclusion: Sony has the best light transmission and excellent center sharpness, but with a maximum aperture of f/5.6 at full zoom leaves it struggling to focus in lower lighting conditions. The Tamron is weaker in light transmission, but also has a tiny bit of extra zoom reach and is just as sharp as the Sony, with the addition of a maximum fixed aperture of f/2.8. The Sigma is very quiet when focusing (not loud like the Tamron), but it has the worst sharpness of all three and is the heaviest of the bunch (and most expensive).


Sony's kit lens is a winner in the price war, because the Tamron is a screw drive and needs an La-ea4 adapter to work (or an a mount camera). Tamron kicks butt for under 300 bucks for the lens itself and over a decade old. Sigma is... disappointing at best. It's quiet, good for video?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had some free time and gave the Tamron another whirl on an a7rii. Cat was almost cooperative.


Tamron @ 75mm f/2.8




100% crop



Tamron @ 75mm f/5.6



100% crop




I adore the image quality out of this tiny little sub-300 USD lens, but I really must sell it. Anyone have a good home for this and an LA-EA4?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites


I am comparing the Tamron 28-75 F2.8 with the Sony Zeiss 24-70mm SSM lens. I have an A6000 and would buy a LA-EA5 to make this work. I know Zeiss are expensive, but ebay has some for under $400. Any thoughts on which one I should get? 

Also, with the LA-EA5, will these lenses do phase-detection AF?





Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Create New...