User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Nikon 16-35 or Tamron 15-30

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    27 Jan 2013
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    76
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Nikon 16-35 or Tamron 15-30

    Hi All,

    I am in the market for a new ultrawide zoom on a full frame camera. i have heard great things about both of these lenses, and was wondering if anyone had either/both and had any suggestions?

    The VR on the Nikon isnt as appealing as the fact that it goes to 35mm. (plan on using ultra wide, 50mm prime and 85mm prime for pretty much everything) but i dont think i would really lose much if i were to go with the Tamron.

    anyway i would love to hear everybody's opinion.

    hanks in advance
    Hi im Steven,
    I have been known to take photos of stuff, usually landscapes, dabbling in environmental portraits

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/StevenFoxPhotography
    500px: https://500px.com/stevenfox_
    Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mortalitas/

  2. #2
    Member NQWombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Nov 2015
    Location
    Roma
    Posts
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi,

    I personally have the Nikon 18-35 and find it wide enough for capturing office or house room with no vignetting when not stopped down. I have used it also for fireworks and find it good. If I was in the market for a wide lens I would go for the Nikon for the range and the fixed aperture.

    Regards

    Mark

  3. #3
    Who let the rabble in? Lance B's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    8,054
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The Tamron seems to be an excellent lens and gets good reviews. Here is a good one from Photography Life by Mansurov, a very well respected photographer and reviewer:

    https://photographylife.com/reviews/tamron-15-30mm-f2-8

    I have the 16-35 which I think is an excellent lens also, but if I had my time over, I may give the Tamron serious consideration. The only drawback is that it doesn't have filter thread

  4. #4
    Still in the Circle of Confusion Cage's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 May 2010
    Location
    Hunter Valley
    Posts
    5,350
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Both seem to get excellent reviews but for me the extra 'f' stop would make the Tamron hard to pass up.

    The Tamron is on my wish list. ( I already have the 24-70 and the 70-200 and if it is up to the same standard as those two it will be a ripper)
    Last edited by Cage; 01-01-2016 at 5:02pm.
    Cheers
    Kev

    D600 : D7200 and too much stuff to list

  5. #5
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    16,814
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by NQWombat View Post
    Hi,

    I personally have the Nikon 18-35 and find it wide enough for capturing office or house room with no vignetting when not stopped down. I have used it also for fireworks and find it good. If I was in the market for a wide lens I would go for the Nikon for the range and the fixed aperture.

    Regards

    Mark
    Hi Mark. Thanks for posting your experience, which is always good to have first hand.
    But I just have to point out that it is not "fixed aperture" in the case of this lens but instead a "constant f-stop".
    That feature does indeed make the aperture quite variable throughout the focal length for this lens while maintaining the same "f-stop".

    Technically - for the sake of terminology for less-experienced users than yourself - "aperture" is an actual distance measure, while
    an "f-stop" is a ratio of focal length to aperture.

    Am.
    Last edited by ameerat42; 01-01-2016 at 6:57pm.
    CC, Image editing OK.

  6. #6
    D750 Shines cupic's Avatar
    Join Date
    10 Oct 2009
    Location
    Wollongong
    Posts
    782
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    A glance at price seems to put the tamron slightly ahead on price of the nikkor that being a bit more expensive


    cheers




    Nikon D750,D700,D300s,Coolpix P7700
    Nikkor 300mm f/4E PF ED VR, Nikkor 16-35mm f/4 VR, Nikkor 70mm-300mm VR, 35mm DX f/1.8, 50mm D f/1.8, 85mm D f/1.8, Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, Tokina 100mm f/2.8, Tamron 60mm f/2 , Tamron SP 24-70mm f2.8 VC Di

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    16 Aug 2013
    Location
    Mildura
    Posts
    53
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Late to respond here Steven & not sure if you've already bought? I have had the 16-35 for a few years know and toyed with the idea of selling it to get the Tamron 15-30 after its great reviews, but stuck with the Nikon purely on the filter issue. I just couldn't be bothered mucking around with filter kits for it, when all my other lenses share the 77mm thread. More expensive, less convenience etc. I'm happy with the 16-35 with the VR as it opens up many more opportunities at slow speeds too. I used the same rationale for the 20mm Nikon 1.8 after having already purchased a used, but mint 24mm 1.4.

  8. #8
    Ausphotography Regular MissionMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Feb 2012
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,824
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    How are you finding the 20 f/1.8? I love mine
    Fuji XT-2, Fuji X-E3, Fuji X100T, Fuji VPB-XT2, Fujinon 16-55 f/2.8, Fujinon 50-140 f/2.8, Fujinon 35 f2, Fujinon 90 f/2, Fujinon 60 f/2.4 Macro, Yongnuo YN560 IV, Yongnuo YN560 TX, Benro C3580T, Mefoto Q00
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/atholhill
    http://www.theoverratedphotographer.com
    https://www.instagram.com/theoverratedphotographer/


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •