My 3rd copy of Tamron 28-75

alib99 · 03-01-2008, 09:51 PM

2 weeks ago, I got a Tamron 28-75 from BIC camera in Japan. When I came home, I made a simple newspaper test realized that the corners were incredibly soft. Next day, I took it to the shop and asked for a replacement. They took some test shots by themselves and accepted to replace it. Before accepting the new one, I wanted to test it in the store. Unfortunately, it was worse than the first one and they did not have another sample. So, they refunded my money.

On my Trip to Tokyo 2 days ago, I purchased this lens again with the hope that the 3rd copy will not have this issue. I did not have time and I made a very quick test in the shop and it seemed fine. But when I came home, I realized that I was wrong. Now, I have a FF problem together with very obvious left bottom corner softness (centering problem I guess).

Now, the problem is, I do not live in Tokyo and I cannot take the lens to the camera shop for a refund or replacement. I really want this lens and I think the fourth copy will have a similar issue anyways. What I am willing to do is to send this lens to Tamron Japan and ask for a calibration. Is this possible? Do you know the contact adress of Tamron Japan? In their English section of their web site I could not find any contact information.

PS: I have a K10D which focusses perfectly with FA35 and DA70. I am sure that my K10D does not have a FF/BF problem.

AF corner %100 crop, 75mm/f2.8:

Another photo at 75mm/f2.8: (Does not allow me to upload the original file but even from this photo the problem is evident.)

Tingchaleun · 03-01-2008, 10:03 PM

I had a FF issue with the same lens that i bought from Japan, but over ebay. I sent it back to the seller, who also owns a store, and they were kind enough to replace it for me. I understand the situation you're in. The warranty card and everything that came with the lens was in japanese...So i felt kinda lost. I don't think i will ever buy from overseas again, just in case...

alib99 · 03-01-2008, 10:08 PM

Thanks. I live in Japan but not in Tokyo.
I do not know Japanese and I am used to feeling kinda lost

little laker · 03-01-2008, 10:16 PM

Here's their contact page
I would at least hope that they'll help you out, although I've never dealt with them

Lots of luck with it.

alib99 · 03-01-2008, 10:32 PM

Thank you little laker. I saw that page but they are mainly sales office pages. I could not find a service contact page. Anyways, I will contact to one of the sales offices tomorrow.

little laker · 03-01-2008, 10:35 PM

Originally Posted by alib99

Thank you little laker. I saw that page but they are mainly sales pages. I could not find a service page contact. Anyways, I will contact to one of the sales offices tomorrow.

In my opinion customer service is all part of Sales, so they should really help you out. And at least give you the correct contact info.

Lots of luck with it.

Lowell Goudge · 03-02-2008, 06:46 AM

You need to decide whether this is a macro lens or a normal lens. Macros are designed to be flat field lenses. you may be expecting something oout of this lens that is not realistic

alib99 · 03-02-2008, 07:40 AM

Originally Posted by Lowell Goudge

You need to decide whether this is a macro lens or a normal lens. Macros are designed to be flat field lenses. you may be expecting something oout of this lens that is not realistic

Actually, I have never thought about this. However, I used the lens in the field as well. The results are not satisfactory. I have a 1:1 macro lens and I will use tamron as a normal lens.

I made the same test with wide open DA70 and FA35. They are perfectly sharp and focused even at the extreme borders.

I would be pleased if someone can post a similar shot with tamron.

SPA · 03-02-2008, 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by alib99

....
I would be pleased if someone can post a similar shot with tamron.

I think your lens is OK and Lowell Goudge is right.

Lowell Goudge · 03-02-2008, 03:17 PM

In looking back at the OP, I also believe he is not square to the paper, making the focus unequal side to side.

I have one of these lenses and although I have only done several hindred shots since getting it, I am extremely pleased with it.

I am almost tempted to compare this with my macro lens on a test like this just to silence the critics and show the differences, but I got rid of the copy stand I made from an old enlarger.

pentkon52 · 03-03-2008, 12:09 PM

Originally Posted by Lowell Goudge

You need to decide whether this is a macro lens or a normal lens. Macros are designed to be flat field lenses. you may be expecting something oout of this lens that is not realistic

Mine did it in both aspects.:-(

Sorry to hear you are having the same problem i had.

Good luck

Dave

**Buddha Jones** · 03-03-2008, 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by alib99

Actually, I have never thought about this. However, I used the lens in the field as well. The results are not satisfactory. I have a 1:1 macro lens and I will use tamron as a normal lens.

I made the same test with wide open DA70 and FA35. They are perfectly sharp and focused even at the extreme borders.

I would be pleased if someone can post a similar shot with tamron.

When I first started to read this thread I had the same exact thoughts as Lowell, I would only expect those perfect resultes from a macro lens, the key worf there being expect. And to compare this lens again with two prime lenses, i would say it is also unfair. I do own the lens but have not done this type test myself I will gladly do it tomorrow and post my results to see how mine stacks up.

But ultimately you have to ask yourself how often are you going to shoot a newspaper or similar composition?

alib99 · 03-04-2008, 03:02 AM

Originally Posted by Buddha Jones

When I first started to read this thread I had the same exact thoughts as Lowell, I would only expect those perfect resultes from a macro lens, the key worf there being expect. And to compare this lens again with two prime lenses, i would say it is also unfair. I do own the lens but have not done this type test myself I will gladly do it tomorrow and post my results to see how mine stacks up.

But ultimately you have to ask yourself how often are you going to shoot a newspaper or similar composition?

Just for the record, newspapers are not my favorite subjects as well

Considering the sample variation rumors about this lens, I just wanted to make sure that my copy is not faulty so that when I shot some not-so-good photo, I blame myself instead of the lens.

100% crops, f5.6, 4, 2.8, distance >5m

Corner:

Center: (Focus point at the ribbon)

**Buddha Jones** · 03-04-2008, 09:14 AM

OK, so here is my not so scientific test results. I took these with the paper laying on a table and the camera tripod mounted at 75mm about 7 inches from the lens.

Here are the full images, I realize that I messed up no the F2.8 shot after I got to my PC and was too lazy to set it all up again and do it over. Hence the not so scientific part.

F 2.8

F4

F5.6

F8

Top Left

Bottom Right

Center

Now I know what you are thinking, OMG, my lens is busted. I say hardly. I just hand held the camera and took a shot af f/2.8 from about 7 inches away of text on a document and it came out loverly. But with all that being said, I am not the least bit concerned or disappointed in this lens. Each lens has its purpose, this is a 'portrait' type lens and for me a very good walk around lens where the focus is not going to be the top left corner, or any corner for that matter, for me that will 99% of the time always be OOF area and will fall into the wonderful bokeh that this lens can produce. If I wanna do macro, I have macro lenses for that.

ggad · 03-04-2008, 11:54 PM

Originally Posted by Lowell Goudge

You need to decide whether this is a macro lens or a normal lens.

Does this lens ( Tamron SP AF28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) MACRO) has two versions?

I'm a newbie and t his is the second time reading about non-macro version. I ordered mine and was surprised to find the "Macro" on the label.

enlighten me.

thanks.