The Tamron compared to the Nikon-original on the D90 (DX) and D600 (FX)

What I use this lens
I document mainly my family life, am sometimes but also ambitious in the field of landscape and Architektureaufnahmen go. I've learned during my training to deal with an SLR, so use not only the automatic program but go happy times "scraping the barrel".
Since family life mainly takes place in the house and at least one third of the year are winter light conditions, can be my primary challenge characterized as follows: 'to photograph fast-moving subjects in low light conditions. Hence the need for a fast standard zoom lens

Below my original review for DX (mm format), below a supplement with my experience for FX (full-frame)

My equipment
My previous standard equipment is D90 with a Nikkor AF-S 18-105mm 1: 3.5-5.6G VR. To compensate for lack of light I use the flash Nikon SB 900, which is extremely recommended and "tame" excellent if necessary can to conjure z. B. Christmas mood with candles on images, rather than simulating lighting as bright as daylight. Although the Vibration Reduction (VR) in the lens can compensate for the trembling of my hand, but not the movement of my children in action.

The original Nikon or Tamron?
My favorite was the perceived Nikon AF-S Zoom Nikkor 24-70mm 1: 2.8G ED, which leaves an excellent impression in test reports. I then ordered me both lenses and have come after extensive testing at the following conclusion:

+ The picture of both lenses at both 24 as well as 70 mm absolutely identical! Many reviews say the Tamron would not reach the focal length of Nikon. This I can not confirm definitively.

+ Also regarding the color quality and detail, both lenses can hold a candle. Incorrect color reproduction on both lenses always based on an incorrect setting on the camera in Neonlichtaufnahmen etc. The lenses themselves form the complete RGB color space perfectly from.

- When shooting in the dark with light sources in the image (street lamp, room lamp) tends to flare the Tamron. The quality of the original is much better here Niko optics.

+ The selectable Image Stabilization of the Tamron is certainly a major plus. He can not be compared with the reliability of Nikon VR II, giving good service but perfectly. The often criticized slowdown in auto focus I could not tell. A clear advantage if you need it, because the Nikkor 24-70 comes without image stabilizer.

+ The depth of both lenses is absolutely identical. Both lenses allow extremely high depth of field and a wonderful bokeh.
I have asked each of the two extreme points test series under different lighting conditions of perfectly lit up shot extremely critical, while focused various distances and aperture. One can not tell the difference in the depth of focus and the picture quality in all its facets.

In +/- "macro range", the Nikon lens points. It can bring in DX format a 12 cm cut on's image, the Tamron "only" 14 cm. But that seems to me marginally, also yes both are not true macro lenses.

+ The autofocus lenses of both works precisely and quietly along with the camera. The speed is excellent on the D90. I suppose this is my camera the brake. So for me no knock-out criterion. The sound of both lenses is different and will certainly perceived subjectively. I felt both as a quiet and pleasant.

+ The processing of both lenses is high. The setting rings run smoothly and with the right game or resistance.

+ The Nikon is impressive (size matters!), The Tamron much more compact. Thus, the Tamron has a significantly smaller leverage and less top-heavy. This facilitates steadying the camera.

+/- To Vignetiierung and distortion I dare any statement because I have tested the lens on a DX camera only. For me, the predicted curvatures of Tamron have not been set at the wide angle even with geometric objects.

+ 5 years warranty for the Tamron

Summary
The slight advantage in "macro range" and the oppressed flare when light sources are not worth me the higher price for the Niko lens. The selectable Image Stabilization of the Tamron is a significant plus. The compact design of Tamron allows me to continue using the existing camera bag.
Although My heart bleeds to have on my Nikon camera a third-party lens. But I find the photo quality as outstanding, did not therefore feel to have entered a compromise in favor of a more favorable price.

Important technical note
My review refers exclusively to the interaction with a miniature sensor (DX Niko name, often referred to as APS-C), in my case, a D90. This means that it can absorb a part of the image only, which allows the lens. Furthermore, the shutter lag is significantly greater than that of a professional full-frame camera, the FX series. Just my positive assessment regarding Vignette, curvature etc. must therefore be seen in this context, since the critical edges are cut off from my camera.

Update May 2015: experiences on the D600 (FX / Full Frame)

Since the Tamron has quickly become my favorite lens, I (crop factor 1.5 FX lens on DX-sensor) was very eingeschänkt but the focal length ago, I have indulged in a full-frame camera to me a year ago, three-quarters. So I can enjoy the Tamron to its full extent and am still completely happy.

Processing
I have the Tamron on a Sunsniper belt clip with activity at every excursion (also biking, hiking, climbing gently) wherever you go. Ie. It "dangles" the man and takes every jolt with! Despite the fact that the lens does not have an internal focus, but extends, the lens does not show the slightest Verschleisserscheinung. It is in spite of the tortures knocked out, nor it rotates on itself. The build quality is top!

Image Quality
A professional photographer had promised much higher contrast values ​​on full frame. I had only suspected higher resolution and therefore never placed value on this upgrade. The lens is recommended and absolutely fully compatible format in every respect:
- Insane contrast values
- Realistic and comprehensive range of hues. Each image is the moment exactly again, as I have seen him.
- Extremely high luminous intensity (see "more" light than the human eye, Events indoors can usually be mastered without a flash I have for comparison, a lens with Aperture 1.4 for available-light photography, I need only at night.)
- Beautiful bokeh and very plastic exemption of objects.
. - Extremely fast and quiet autofocus (I ultimately photographed an event in a dark church: No flash and, also thanks to "silent" release of the camera, no noise nuisance The AF, if used, was in "continuos" mode even at these light always unswervingly and clean on the moving object. Well, in the service is not running, but who ever had to hold an insert / extract with dark nave and strong incident sunlight through the open doors, know what I mean)
- Extremely high resolution and definition. Even faces a group recording show when zoomed in more detail than I sometimes with my D90 in full portrait could represent
- My copy is ideally adjusted at the factory, the focal point is 100% where you would expect it. And the brighter the lens, the more important that you have the Planarebene under control.
- Vignetting, edge blur, unwanted glare effects etc: None! I work a lot in the extreme ranges of the lens and am surprised by the objective quality always positive.

Summary:
The price / value ratio of this lens is unique. Without in "Nachrezension" to try again against the original lens from Nikon, I weep for this no tear. Each photo confirms my decision at the Tamron, have not resorted to the cheaper, but for cheaper and absolutely equivalent lens.
Unrestricted buy recommendation!