First impression: I bought that lens after buying the D3 full frame camera. The Nikkor 24-70 2.8 was not available in the shops where I usually buy my equipment. I have a 35-70 2.8, I tested it, and while picture quality was not an issue, I wanted more reach mainly at the wide end. 35mm was just not wide enough. I decided to go for the Tamron while waiting for the Nikkor and I have been positively impressed. While build quality is not on par, the lens is nicely build, relatively heavy, and pictures are just excellent.
Pros:
- price, price, price
- optical
performance (sharp, even the corners are sharp, even fully open - see restrictions below)
- reasonably light (comparable to the pro Nikkor lenses)
- compact
- non-rotating front element
- reasonably fast focus (not critical in that focal range)
- constant 2.8 aperture
- plastic build
- no pouch delivered with the lens
- not too sharp above 50mm fully open (need to close down a bit to 3.2 or 3.5)
- no focus correction possible
vs the Nikkor
- the Nikkor is enormous, very heavy and built like a tank
- the Nikkor has AF-S (faster, built in motor, manual
correction possible)
- the Nikkor is a pro-lens, and worth
the money because of the extremely good performance all over the range
Conclusion:
if you are a pro, or if you have deep pockets, go for the Nikkor 24-70, no hesitation, if you want a lot of lens for a few euros/dollars, go for the Tamron, highly recommended.
A few examples
