Difference in Tamron Full Frame & APS-C Lens

[Aaron Jones Sr.]

Hi Chris,

Yes the closer the better for weddings, but me and my wife are trying our hand at some of everything to see what we like the most. We are trying commercials, fashion shows, PSA's, TV Shows, and I also would like to get back to some short films if i can ever get the time. So having some versatile glass is a premium as i never know what i will need until I get the opportunity. Sometimes you get into a limited situations. I have my 3rd cam now which is a 70D DSLR andI'm looking to get three different point of views with my weddings. I'm even looking to check out a flying drone the DJI 2 Phantom Vision to ad that little extra to our product in hopes to add value. So for me it is about trying out different things and seeing what will work and in what situation. That being said, I have grab a lot of wisdom from you and I'm putting it to good use.

[Steven Digges]

Chris, I think you have a bum lens. It should not perform that poorly. Also, your preferred focal lengths have always fascinated me. I always wonder if you are up in their faces to get tight shots or if shooting as wide as you do is part of your "personal style"? I started out shooting professional sports for a living (stills). My two primary lenses were Nikon 300mm f2.8 and a 600mm f4. Shooting tight and tack sharp was pounded into me. That style still caries over into almost everything I shoot today. In other words, the shallow DOF rage of today has been with me since 1990 : )

Aaron, Full frame vs APSC should have no effect on perceptible sharpness. It does affect other things already mentioned. I shoot with all Canon FF "L" series glass, (I did however keep my kit lenses). They are consistently sharp and a good match.

I been following your posts as you expand your kit and I have a word of advise. In weddings there is a lot of leeway to do and use what ever the shooter wants to get the job done. In this thread you said you want to expand into commercial work. It is a different ballgame altogether. For instance, every lens and every camera produces its own look. Shooting with cameras and lenses that match each other is a minimum expected professional requirement on commercial shoots. Using a kit with an assortment of different camera models and a selection of lenses from different manufacturers rarely happens. If I were you I would pick a line of lenses from one manufacturer and stick to that line and that line only. It should be the highest quality line you can reasonably afford. You also said "I don't mind my soft lens because I lean towards a film look". You can throw that lens and that type of thinking away if you are going to venture outside the wedding market. No offence to anyone, just my opinion.

Steve

[Aaron Jones Sr.]

Hi Steven,

Thank you for your advise. I take all the wisdom I can. I have been learning to have a certain style of shooting. What I have been doing so far is to shoot for the way I want to edit. I don't shoot to have a finish product right out of the cam. I think there is a balance of shooting properly to lessen the amount of edit that is needed. With my latest wedding videos I have been getting more popular in the wedding market. i find that I have been shooting incorrectly but have been saved by my editing and the use of Magic bullet and the Denoiser. I read as much as i can on these threads to get a better understanding to the art of videography. It is a given that I have so much to learn, but I like it. Because my wife is a photographer we are loving working together. I have only been doing this for about a year. I work at my regular job 12 hours a day 7 days a week unless I have an event to shoot. That being said I have a limited about of time when i get out of work to research and practice. Youtube has been one of my main teachers. Now that I have been here i have learned even more to read your understanding behind why you do what you do. Anyway thank you for your advice it is taken with an appreciative heart.

[Chris Harding]

Thanks Steve

It's gone now!! Some budding photographer wanted it for his lens collection. I have the Tamron 17-50 F2.8 to replace it and that does a far better job. Then again it also might just be my age/eyes?? It's a lot harder to accurately focus a lens at 75mm than one at 50mm as your DOF is a lot tighter at F2.8 ... At 50mm I can technically fall short of the true focus point and still be sharp whilst at 75mm I need to be spot on. At weddings it's sometimes pretty hard for the camera to find something to focus peak on in the half darkness so the more latitude I have the better.

I use a lot of ambient audio at receptions, guest congratulations and the rest so standing 40' away with a honking great tele lens means I have no contact with the subject plus my audio will suck!! I shoot normally about 10' away so the shotgun mic gets acceptable audio and I can interact with the subject without shouting!!

Chris

[Francisco Estrada]

Originally Posted by Aaron Jones Sr.

The SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD is looking really sweet to me.

This is the one iam looking at. And its only 700$

Amazon.com : Tamron AF 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD IF Macro Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras (Model A001E) : Camera Lenses : Electronics

[Aaron Jones Sr.]

Hi Francisco Estrada,

That is a very nice lens. Keep in mind that that one does not have Vibration Control.

[Ryan Douthit]

Francisco, I owned that cheap Tamron 70-200 and though the image is good for the money, the build quality isn't pro. Also, that lens doesnt have any weather sealing. In fact, mine is sitting on a shelf with damaged focus gears due to some dust that got into it. For photography the auto-focus was pretty useless (loud, slow.) I never use AF in video, but given it's loud, slow performance I can safely say it would be a poor choice for that application.

I replaced the cheap one with with the much, much better SP 70-200 (in A-Mount, no VC) Yes, even at twice the price, it's more than twice the lens. Sharp. Super-fast with near silent focus and the focus ring in the right place.
http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-70-200M.../dp/B00A34GQEC

[Aaron Jones Sr.]

Ok guys, I have an update on this thread. I was noticing that my 17-50mm f/2.8 was looking more vivid than the 24-70mm f/2.8. So I did the unthinkable... I saw a youtube video that showed how to take the tamron lens apart and clean it and i tried it.

Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 repair & cleaning glass - YouTube

To my surprise after i cleaned both ends of the lens it has more sharpness and more vivid in color. I was able to clean some dust out of both ends and give the glass a good clean with my micro fiber rag. I DO NOT RECOMMEND THIS TO ANYONE AT ALL. I'm an electrician and I'm used to electronics and so on so I thought I would give it a try. I was originally set to send it to Tamron and get it cleaned until I cam across the video and thought about it for a while. It is very very delicate and anyone trying this would need to have some precision tools. I got lucky and all went well. I will be looking at my other lenses a little funny now and may get the itch to try them.

To be honest it was bothering me that my 17-50mm was seemingly showing more quality than my 24-70mm and the 24-70mm is worth double the value of the 17-50mm. Now I can make another comparison and see how it turns out. If I have time I will try and make a little video of before and after the cleaning.

[Chris Harding]

Awesome Aaron and also very brave!!

I tried to strip a Sigma 24-70 once as the zoom bearings got sticky but in the end it was a doorstop!!

The Tamron 17-50 (non VC model) has a reputation of being ultra sharp compared to other lenses so don't beat yourself up if the 24-40 still doesn't look as good. The VC model isn't as sharp as the non-VC one for some reason?

Chris