Nikon 24-70 vc New Tamron 24-70

[felix5616]

I would like to hear from anyone using the nikon 24-70ED lens as to image quality with the lens on a Nikon D800E. I am interested in a 24-70 zoom for my D800E and would like to hear from D800 users as to which 24-70 is considered the sharpest.

 

[tashley]

The Nikkor is generally considered sharper on a d800 I believe. The Tamron is lighter, cheaper, has VR, but the VR on the copy I had really HAD to be switched off at faster shutter speeds (or it actively degraded IQ) and it had a problem that others have also seen whereby as you stopped down from f2.8, the indicated aperture and the actual aperture parted company. Mine was very nice and sharp at mid to longer range but less good at the wide end. I liked it somewhat but, and I will confirm this within a few days when my Nikkor 24-70 arrives, I think the Nikkor is the better lens.

 

[Amin]

Roger Cicala from Lens Rentals recently tested them and found the Nikon to be sharper: LensRentals.com - Roger Buys a Camera System: A 24-70mm System Comparison

 

[Jan Brittenson]

The Nikon is an excellent lens, really nothing to complain about.

The only problem I have with the lensrentals tests is they determine the line count at which one stop (50%) of the contrast is lost. (MTF50) With a camera that has 14 stops of dynamic range this isn't really all that relevant, and the general notion that loss of global contrast implies loss of resolution and microcontrast only goes that far. For instance, vignetting will affect MTF50, and drop-off is rarely linear since aberrations aren't. And some aberrations, like chromatic aberration, has only limited impact on MTF. Finally a lens-camera combo that has an MTF50 close to 1000 line pairs is guaranteed to outresolve the camera well below extinction, so for all practical purposes it will get what there is to bring. Noise permitting you can just bump up contrast a little in post - which you would anyway to print since the attenuation in the printing process can be quite severe. Some printers practically require B&W line art at anything over 200 ppi or it won't show. Of course, for such small detail it also doesn't matter whether it's accurately reproduced in terms hue and tone; it's more a "there or not" thing.

 

[Jan Brittenson]

By the way, my 24-70 had an AF tune error that varied with focal length; this is indicative of decentering. I sent it to Nikon USA who did a rebuild and sent it back - perfect. The overall improvement is actually fairly obvious. It needs no AF tune on my D800E.

 

[tashley]

The Nikon is an excellent lens, really nothing to complain about.

The only problem I have with the lensrentals tests is they determine the line count at which one stop (50%) of the contrast is lost. (MTF50) With a camera that has 14 stops of dynamic range this isn't really all that relevant, and the general notion that loss of global contrast implies loss of resolution and microcontrast only goes that far. For instance, vignetting will affect MTF50, and drop-off is rarely linear since aberrations aren't. And some aberrations, like chromatic aberration, has only limited impact on MTF. Finally a lens-camera combo that has an MTF50 close to 1000 line pairs is guaranteed to outresolve the camera well below extinction, so for all practical purposes it will get what there is to bring. Noise permitting you can just bump up contrast a little in post - which you would anyway to print since the attenuation in the printing process can be quite severe. Some printers practically require B&W line art at anything over 200 ppi or it won't show. Of course, for such small detail it also doesn't matter whether it's accurately reproduced in terms hue and tone; it's more a "there or not" thing.

What a brilliant, practical and erudite comment. I am going to freely steal your phrase 'it will get what there is to bring' since it seems to be such a very fine coining!