Tamron 14mm F2.8 SP AF Aspherical IF A-mount lens reviews
reviews found: 7
 balacau#9581 date: Nov-12-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 Sigma 10mm F2.8 fisheye |
| price paid: | 70GPB (used) |
| positive: | Wide FoV (especially for aps-c) Well built Produces sharp images Price (bought 2nd hand) Neat little bad which doubles as lens cap; never been a fan of Tamron lens caps! |
| negative: | Weight Rather vulnerable front element Flare |
| comment: | I'd been looking for a suitable wide angle prime for my aps-c dSLR/SLT bodies for some time and a fellow Dyxum member gave me the chance of purchasing his when I was enquiring about various 14mm primes. This lens has produced some very nice and crisp shots during daylight and has also proved its worth (despite flare issues) in low light conditions. Its nice and wide even on my a55, easy to use in both AF and MF, despite being a little heavier than what I was expecting. Its a good workhorse and a lens I really do enjoy using. If anyone's looking to get one, I'd have to say just to be careful of the front element, it does bulge somewhat and therefore may be easily damaged! Apart from the flare issue, I really can't fault this lens. Its just a shame it is not still available, probably replaced by Tamron's 10-24mm UWA zoom? I'm quite confident that most of my low light shooting will be done with this lens or the Sony SAL-50F18. |
; 16MP| Sean21#9242 date: Jul-19-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 411 USD (used) |
| positive: | Sharp wide open Great indoors museums ect 21mm on APS-C |
| negative: | no screw in filters |
| comment: | missing |
| alphaPDX#5336 date: May-4-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron Di 17-35, 18-250 Minolta 50.1.7, 35-105N, 70-210/3.5-4.5 |
| price paid: | 355 USD (new) |
| positive: | Strongly built, very sharp, good bokeh |
| negative: | Heavy and easy to catch flare |
| comment: | This lens was deeply discounted and finally reached my price point. I wish it were lighter, but that's the only real drawback; yes it has flare, but not as destructive to overall contrast as my older Minolta lenses. It seems to have some back focus, seen in low-light closeups, but MF images and more-forgiving shots look very crisp. Color is bright and neutral, no complaints there. A fine, solid, heavy lens that I'm happy to lug around. |
| kaisal0#3343 date: Mar-6-2008 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 12-24 Sigma 14 F 2,8 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Very Good Built |
| negative: | Low sharpness especially in the edges Difficult flare control |
| comment: | I wanted to by this lens and change it with my Sigma 12-24. In front of I was able to test the Tamron vs. the Sigma. It was a great suprise that the Sigma lens is much better than the Tamron. The colors of the Sigma 12-24 are better and the sharpness of the Sigma is 2 steps in front of the Tamron. The Tamrons has extremly difficults with sharphness in the edges of the picture. May be this lens was great on analog film cameras. For digital use this is not the first choice. |
| oysteinm#3038 date: Dec-4-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 2 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tokina 17mm ATX |
| price paid: | USD 555 (used) |
| positive: | Sharp, wide FOV, fast, good lens pouches |
| negative: | Flare, protruding front element |
| comment: | Lens is fast and sharp and displays little chromatic aberration (compared to Tokina 17mm, which gave quite a bit). Distortion is well behaved on Digital sensor and I've used it some for shooting my children playing indoors and helping out in the kitchen. I mounted it on my 700si but was not able to take any pictures before it refused to start again. |
| redmalloc#2837 date: Oct-8-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 15/2.8 Fisheye Minolta 16/2.8 Fisheye |
| price paid: | 500 USD (Used) |
| positive: | Sharp Fantastic field of view Full frame Well built Crazy front element |
| negative: | Heavy Flare Crazy front element |
| comment: | -- I have only had a short time to evaluate this lens, so I may need to return to edit this review later. -- Bottom line: This is a very interesting and impressive lens. On a 6MP KM5D in good shooting situations the resolution is fantastic and surely would hold up well on the higher resolution sensors. Before this lens I thought my fisheye lenses had good resolution (and they do) but always look a little weird or "busy" in high detail areas (e.g. leaves on a tree) of an image. I don't see that with this lens. Flare is a problem, but it can be managed. Flares show up fairly small and so far it hasn't been too hard to work around. What did surprise me was how easily you can pick up flares indoors when lights are in the frame. I don't have another lens that does this to any noticeable degree, so I was rather surprised - and it spoiled what would have been a very nice shot. Color is neutral. It isn't as nice as the old Minoltas but maybe it is a little more "fair"? On the 5D, metering and white balance seem more difficult than with longer lenses. Distortion looks very good. I don't shoot a lot of buildings or interiors but from what I have seen it is quite good. As far as handling goes, although it is heavy it felt comfortable to me. The front element is crazy to look at with wild multicolor reflections and it is easy to keep in mind how vulnerable it is. Focusing is fast and accurate. So far I am loving this lens. |
| fluarchs#2186 date: Apr-20-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | sigma 15 f2.8 fisheye |
| price paid: | 400.00 usd |
| positive: | i do architectural work, and this lens is superb. so little distortion is introduced, there is never a question of the accuracy and relations in the picture. |
| negative: | h-e-a-v-y, but you can't fault the quality of construction. |
| comment: | i am totally satisfied with this lens. it rarely comes off the camera, no matter what i'm capturing / documenting. the speed is fast enough to forego flash, and the pictures at clear as a bell. the only drawback with the 7D i use it primarily with is, so much information is in the field of view, i yearn for a 10mp sensor to provide detail throughout. It is everything i wanted ... spot on on focus and fast. Of course that big globe of glass is waiting for a trauma, but so goes life. I couldn't be happier ... i can't wait to try this one out on humans in a major way, and get silly and creative ... but there is no comparisons to a fisheye. it's entirely different. can you imagine the size of some of those feet or noses you can do? :-) |
reviews found: 7
rating summary
- total reviews: 7
- sharpness: 4.64
- color: 4.43
- build: 5.00
- distortion: 4.57
- flare control: 3.29
- overall: 4.39
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login