Tamron vs Canon
Canon 24-70/2.8 L compared to Tamron 28-75/2.8 on the Canon EOS 1 Ds
This is a direct comparison of the Canon prestige mid-range fast zoom lens, and the new Tamron XR DI, especially designed for digital photography. The images were shot inside Roskilde Cathedral, using daylight through the cathedral windows. Overcast and extremely dull, this nordic winter light is a serious challenge for a photographer. Evidently the lenses aren´t centered identically, and the focal lenght of 50 mm seems wider on the Tamron lens, but since I don´t have any measuring instruments I couldn´t tell which lens is correctly centered. While the Canon lens is built like a tank, the Tamron build is not poor, and seems to function as fast and equally silent (The Tamron XR DI 180/3.5 is audible however, compared to the silent Canon lenses.) The size/weight difference is considerable, in favor of Tamron XR DI 28-75/2.8. Surprisingly, at less than half price of the Canon lens, the Tamron comes out with better contrast at full aperture. The Tamron lens seems "warmer". I could have adjusted this in the raw processing software, but chose not to, in order to display the color difference you would experience using lenses from both manufacturers alongside eachother. Which tone is more pleasing is a matter of taste I guess. I used the same raw processing procedure for all the first 8 images, without color tint, and set to 3800 kelvin, calibrated from the first Canon image.
Not appreciating that the cheaper lens came out best at full aperture, I decided to make the test again next day, this time trying to frame more accurately, to get an idea about the difference in actual focal lenght, and later when I processed the images, I chose to calibrate the raw processing to the Tamron lens, at 4000 kelvin, making a slight adjustment for magenta, making it as pleasing as possible to my eye, taking the existing light in consideration, only 1,5 hour before sunset on a dull winter day. Again examining the images at full aperture, it´s a fact that contrast is better in the Tamron XR DI 28-75/2.8 at the full lens opening, but only slightly. Colours seem a bit more saturated in Tamron XR DI. Whichever is more "neutral" is a scientific discussion I don´t want to get into. Both lenses produce extremely satisfying results. Test object is the beautifully carved alabast/marble figurines on the sides of the magnificent sarcophagus of Queen Margrethe 1, who unified all of Scandinavia in the 13th century, and who is laid to rest in a choir behind the altar of the Unesco World Heritage, Roskilde Cathedral, from the 12th century. Between the two tests are some of the medieval wood carvings flanking the altar and the sarcophagus. The rest of the images are from the altar, and the other royal burial chambers surrounding the Cathedral. Most of them are shot with the excellent Tamron XR DI 180/3.5. Unfortunately I didn´t have the similar Canon lens available for comparison. Finishing up the archive, there are a few images shot outside with Tamron XR DI 180/3.5. Inside images are shot on tripod at 100 iso, outside, hand held at 400 iso. To see the full sized 11 mp image, click on Original, at the bottom of the image that comes up after you click the thumbnail. |
Date(s): January 31, 2004. Album by Jens Otto Nielsen. 1 - 39 of 39 Total. 0 Visits. |
|
