Re: Buying Advice - Used Canon 24-70 f2.8 mk1 or New Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC
hman982 wrote:
Does anyone have experience with both lenses that you could share with me? I am looking for a good workhorse lens and am between the Canon 24-70 f2.8 mk1 (mk2 is too expensive for me) or the new Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC.
I only have the Tamron, shoot it mainly with my 5D3, but sometimes with my backup 7D, too. So can tell you something about the Tamron.
I currently shoot with a Canon 50D, but will hopefully upgrading to a Canon 7D (or hopefully a new version of the 7D) or the Canon 5D Mark II (used) or the 6D later this year.
I recommend you to decide fist basically whether you'll stick with the APS crop format or go for full format. If you stick with APS, a Canon's EF-S 17-55/2.8 or Tamrons quite good 17-50/2.8 might be the better choice, as those lenses offer about the same wide angle to short tele zoom range as a standard 24-70 mm with FF. Btw, if you stick with APS the Sigma 17-70 mm f/2.8-4.5 might be worth checking. The Sigma is less fast in the tele range but offers a quite good macro performance, good optics, bit more versatile zoom range, good mechanical built and is quite compact.
I have rented the Canon 24-70 a bunch of times and have liked its performance for my use, but have never used the Tamron. I have the Canon 24-70 currently on hold at the local camera shop to give me time to decide. The date code on the Canon is UX1215, which I believe indicates that the lens was built in 2009.
With my Tamron I have mixed experiences. It is very well built, solid and offers overall a very good optical performance (for a zoom) on FF. DxO scores it optically quite close to Canon's new 24-70/2.8 II on FF
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Which-lenses-should-you-choose-for-your-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-vs.-Nikon-D800-Competition-is-closer-than-expected
A big plus is its image stabilizer (VC) as long as you know when to switch it off. Here's an example for a hand held shot I made with 1/5 sec:
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6385346624/photos/2148378/frankfurt
On the downside Tamron's VC can delay AF. Plus, you really have to keep in mind to switch VC off on a tripod since it can blur massively the image if activated (but this is the case with many Canon lenses with non-tripod sensitive IS, too).
Another downside is its noticeable less reliable AF performance in comparison with any good Canon lens. This is typical for 3rd party lenses as their manufacturers don't have full access to all finesses of Canon's (or Nikon's) AF control parameters. With the Tamron this resulted in the strange operation that I get the best results if I switch on my AF microadjustment (made with lenscal) for closer distances and switch it off for far distances. Overall, if you shoot a lot of action (including kids) I'd recommend you to go for the EF 24-70 Mark I.
Optically the Tamron is wide open not so razor sharp in the edges as the 24-70/2.8 II is (according to many reviews I've seen), but I guess it is much better than Canon's aged Mark I. On FF it produces quite strong vignetting wide open but this improves quickly when closing its aperture a bit. Another downside is strong distortion at 24 mm (on FF!), but if you just twist the focal distance by a few mm's the distortion gets well controlled. If you use a good 3rd party RAW converter such as Adobe LR 4 you can correct the distortion in post processing workflow easily. Canon's DPP software as well as in-camera RAW conversion and lens correction (CA + vignetting in later models) do not support any 3rd party lenses.
As I said, sometimes I use the Tamron with my 7D but I never was too impressed with the results. With the small pixels of the 7D, Canon's EF-S 17-55/2.8 offers a tack more sharpness, even it is no match with a good prime. So if you don't move to FF, I'd not really recommend you the Tamron.
Currently, I do not shoot video (as the 50D does not have that capability) but depending on the camera that I end up getting in the future, could see myself shooting short family videos (non-professional).
Both the Tamron and the EF 24-70/2.8 Mark I offer good vid capability, but the Tamron adds image stabilization. Its VC works completely silent.
By the way, the Canon lens is $1,100, while I know that the Tamron is $1,300. Is the Tamron lens an upgrade to the Canon MKI? This particular Canon Lens comes with a 2 week warranty (aka return policy), compared to the Tamron 6 yr warranty.
Tamron's longer warranty is another plus.
As bottom line I'd say, if you really want such a classic 24-70/2.8 standard zoom take the Canon Mark I if reliable and quick AF focusing is most important for you. Otherwise go for the Tamron. But before deciding this check out as well if you could live with the less fast new EF 24-50/4 L IS USM, since this offers IS and for sure a much better AF performance on about the same price level as the Tamron. Only if you really want F/2.8 as an option (low light, better separation of objects focused on), this lens is no option.
Also to add, the local camera shop mentioned some issues with the Canon 24-70 when placed on higher MP cameras. Has anyone noticed this?
no such experience.
Signed
Newbie seeking advice
Good luck with your choice!