Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

2 3 4 5 end

Archive 2006 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

Dave Jr
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

I have both lenses right now, so I thought I'd put them head to head. At the same time, I tested the Tokina 12-24, 16-35L, 18-55 efs, 24-105L, 35/2.0, 70-200 2.8IS, and 70-200 4L. It was quite a time consuming undertaking and I have a dizzying amount of images to sort through. I may post some other comparisons if time permits and if there is interest.

Methodology: All are taken with the 20d (5d is on backorder), heavily weighted tripod, mirror lock up, remote release, one shot AF, center AF point, ISO 100, RAW converted with ACR using WB as shot, contrast at 20, saturation at 9, shadows at zero, exposure tweaked in an attempt to standardize brightness among shots. No sharpening at all. I have ACR set in preferences to apply sharpening to preview images only. This means that sharpening shows up as 25 in the exif, even though NO sharpening was actually applied to the image itself.

I tried to standardize the scene, but the focal lengths do not always match up perfectly, so I had to adjust the tripod head position after some lens changes.

The focal point was the left edge of the satellite dish where the black shadow is. This target was approximately 60 yards away. I'm not perfectly happy with my scene because the sharpness of the wood on the steps can through off ones perception of the sharpness at the actual focal point, however, the results are still interesting to see, especially at the corners. Maybe I'll redo later with a better focal target

. Anyway, I will just present the crops without my personal conclusions and let you guys judge.

Edit: the 28mm comparo is not very fair to the Tamron, as it is it's focal end point, but not so for the Canon. I should note that the 24-70 at 24mm is horrible compared to itself at 28mm all the way until f/5.6, even the kit lens beat it...

Test shots at f/2.8 and f/4.0 at 28mm, 35mm, 50mm and 70mm.
Tamron is always on the left. Canon is always on the right.
The top portion is a 100% center crop
The bottom portion is a crop of the 4 corners, with a center crop overlay.

28mm f/2.8
http://www.pbase.com/davejr/image/71127101/original.jpg

28mm f/4.0
http://www.pbase.com/davejr/image/71127102/original.jpg

35mm f/2.8
http://www.pbase.com/davejr/image/71127103/original.jpg

35mm f/4.0
http://www.pbase.com/davejr/image/71127104/original.jpg

50mm f/2.8
http://www.pbase.com/davejr/image/71127105/original.jpg

50mm f/4.0
http://www.pbase.com/davejr/image/71127106/original.jpg

70mm f/2.8
http://www.pbase.com/davejr/image/71127107/original.jpg

70mm f/4.0
http://www.pbase.com/davejr/image/71127109/original.jpg

Edited by Dave Jr on Dec 04, 2006 at 12:28 PM GMT

Dec 03, 2006 at 11:53 AM

mh2000
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

Thanks for posting!

Dec 03, 2006 at 12:27 PM

hitek79
Offline
• •
[X]

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

wow, that's pretty interesting. how quick is the autofocus on the tamron? i have a tamron 24-135, and while the quality is awesome, the AF sucks. it hunts a lot.

Dec 03, 2006 at 12:31 PM

mathayde
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

Wow, that is a pretty damn big differnce. Glad I got the tamron haha

Dec 03, 2006 at 12:32 PM

Areta
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

L does not seem to be quite winning...

Dec 03, 2006 at 12:36 PM

Dave Jr
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

hitek79 wrote:
wow, that's pretty interesting. how quick is the autofocus on the tamron? i have a tamron 24-135, and while the quality is awesome, the AF sucks. it hunts a lot.

I would say the AF is efficient and accurate, and very reliable, but obviously not as fast as the Canon. I don't know that it "hunts" any more than the Canon, it may just seem that way because you hear every adjustment, whereas the Canon is nearly silent.

Dec 03, 2006 at 12:37 PM

Dave Jr
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

Areta wrote:
L does not seem to be quite winning...

Certainly not at the corners, the Tamron is much better there, and even at f/5.6 as well.

Dec 03, 2006 at 12:39 PM

oasis
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

I had a 24-70L and sold it for a 28-75 because I suspected what your test is now showing - that the extra $600 might be able to be put to better use.

But the L certainly focuses faster, quieter, and looks much better on the cam!

Thanks for posting!

Dec 03, 2006 at 01:33 PM

Tentacle
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

oasis wrote:
I had a 24-70L and sold it for a 28-75 because I suspected what your test is now showing - that the extra $600 might be able to be put to better use.

But the L certainly focuses faster, quieter, and looks much better on the cam!

And don't forget to mention the build. The 24-70L feels more robust (though the Tamron isn't flimsy), takes bigger filters (77 vs 67 mm), is weathersealed and weighs consideraby more than the Tamron: 950 vs 510 g.

Dec 03, 2006 at 03:43 PM

Jim Healey
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

Thanks for this ... very informative.

You say you also tested the Canon 24-105L against the Tamron. I find the Canon to be slightly better optically and I'd be interested in your opinion (I don't expect you to post images ... just a summary if you don't mind).

Dec 03, 2006 at 04:56 PM

Parker Edick
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

good to see this. i am looking for a first walk around daily lens, and have looked at the tamron... i may have found a winner. good post!

Dec 03, 2006 at 04:57 PM

Matt OHarver
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

I have used both of these lens. And while my experience with sharpness is much like yours. The big difference I see in these lens is the AF speed. There are leaps and bounds between the 2. For sports the tamron is useless in that focal range, while the 24-70 is very useful and used by several photogs I know for basketball. I tried volleyball and basketball with the tamron and its very hit and miss due to AF speed, you really have to anticipate alot more with it. Although if your looking for a walk around lens thats sharp and easy on the budget the Tammy wins hands down. Thanks for taking the time to do this and post.

Matt O'Harver

Dec 03, 2006 at 05:28 PM

Kevin Yong
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

Thanks for taking the time to test and post your results.

Dec 03, 2006 at 06:49 PM

Tom K.
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

Much appreciation for the work you put into this. Outstanding job.

Dec 03, 2006 at 07:13 PM

Dave Jr
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

Jim Healey wrote:
Thanks for this ... very informative.

You say you also tested the Canon 24-105L against the Tamron. I find the Canon to be slightly better optically and I'd be interested in your opinion (I don't expect you to post images ... just a summary if you don't mind).

The 24-105 was outstanding, here is the overall summary:

At 16mm Center:
f/2.8: 16-35L pretty solid, only game in town.
f/4.0: 12-24, 16-35L but almost too close to call. 12-24 has more contrast.
f/5.6: Toss up, 16-35L has more detail, 12-24 has more contrast.

At 16mm Corners:
f/2.8: 16-35L Wow!, almost as good as the 12-24 at f/4
f/4.0: 16-35L Wow!, 12-24
f/5.6: 16-35L still, 12-24 closer now.

At 24mm Center:
f/2.8: 16-35L, 24-70L distant second
f/4.0: 16-35L, 24-105L, 18-55efs, 24-70L, 12-24 (last 3 were close)
f/5.6: 16-35L, all others were a dead heat.

At 24mm Corners:
f/2.8: 16-35L Wow!, 24-70L not even close
f/4.0: 16-35L Wow!, 24-105L, 12-24, 18-55, 24-70L
f/5.6: 16-35L Wow!, toss up for the rest, not close

At 35mm Center:
f/2.8: 35/2.0, tie 24-70L & 28-75 & 16-35L, all are very close
f/4.0: 24-105L, 24-70L & 28-75, 16-35L, 35/2.0, 18-55
f/5.6: Toss up

At 35mm Corners:
f/2.8: 28-75 Wow!, 24-70L, 16-35L, 35/2.0
f/4.0: 28-75 Wow!, 24-70L, 24-105L, 16-35L, 35/2.0, 18-55
f/5.6: 28-75 Wow!, then toss up, but nothing close to Tamron.

At 50mm Center:
f/2.8: 24-70L, 28-75
f/4.0: ARGH did not do the 24-105L, missed it somehow

. 24-70L, 28-75.
f/5.6: 24-105L, 24-70L & 28-75 & 18-55 efs equal.

At 50mm Corner:
f/2.8: Toss up
f/4.0: 28-75, 24-70L.
f/5.6: 24-70L, 28-75, 24-105L, 18-55 efs

At 70mm Center:
f/2.8: 70-200IS, 28-75 & 24-70L very close. Corners same: toss up.
f/4.0: 28-75, 24-105L, 70-200IS, 24-70L, 70-200 4L. Corners: 70-200IS, then same.
f/5.6: 24-105L, 24-70L, 28-75, 70-200IS, 70-200 4L. Corners: same as f/4

At 100mm Center:
f/2.8: 70-200IS Wow!
f/4.0: 70-200IS Wow!, 70-200 4L & 24-105L very close
f/5.6: 70-200IS, 70-200 4L, did not do 24-105L, missed it.

At 100mm Coners:
Same

At 135mm and 200mm: 70-200IS beats 70-200 4L center and corners.

I'll be doing an indoor test from a closer distance in the next week, I suspect some of the results may be different, for example the 24-70L seems pretty good at 2.8 at closer distances. Also need this other test to check bokeh, which is where the 24-70L makes it's money. More to come....

Dec 03, 2006 at 09:05 PM

Dave Jr
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

Matt OHarver wrote:
I have used both of these lens. And while my experience with sharpness is much like yours. The big difference I see in these lens is the AF speed. There are leaps and bounds between the 2. For sports the tamron is useless in that focal range, while the 24-70 is very useful and used by several photogs I know for basketball. I tried volleyball and basketball with the tamron and its very hit and miss due to AF speed, you really have to anticipate alot more with it. Although if your looking for a walk around lens thats...Show more →

Yes, I admit that I have not used this lens for sports, I have found f/2.8 is not fast enough for indoor sports. I usually use the 85/1.8 for basketball, but it is a little long on the 20d. I would not recommend the Tamron if AF speed is the primary concern.

Edited by Dave Jr on Dec 03, 2006 at 08:18 PM GMT

Dec 03, 2006 at 09:10 PM

Dave Jr
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

Kevin Yong wrote:
Thanks for taking the time to test and post your results.

You're welcome

Tom K. wrote:
Much appreciation for the work you put into this. Outstanding job.

Thank you

Dec 03, 2006 at 09:12 PM

05xrunner
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

Good little test..I am glad I got my tamron as well. I am ALWAYS impressed with it every time I use it.
yes the canon focus faster but who really uses this focal range for any type of sports or action. I timed my tamron from going infinty to its closest focus distance and it was well under 1sec so thats plenty fast I feel...Also plenty fast and save $600 at the same time

Dec 03, 2006 at 10:27 PM

DSL67
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

05xrunner wrote:
Good little test..I am glad I got my tamron as well. I am ALWAYS impressed with it every time I use it.
yes the canon focus faster but who really uses this focal range for any type of sports or action. I timed my tamron from going infinty to its closest focus distance and it was well under 1sec so thats plenty fast I feel...Also plenty fast and save $600 at the same time

As a portrait photographer, auto focus speed is not important to me. Image quality is. I have been very happy with my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. It's a shame Tamron can produce a lens of this quality for this price and the Canon version is 3x more. Anybody that is not convinced by this thread should check out Will Crocket's article on Shootsmarter.com regarding the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8:

http://www.shootsmarter.com/infocenter/wc006j.html

You may have to sign up with your email address. I'm not sure. But his site is definately worth signing up for. I'ts just takes an email address.

Dec 04, 2006 at 04:16 AM

Jim Healey
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Tamron 28-75 vs Canon 24-70 Test, Bokeh Added!

Dave Jr wrote:
The 24-105 was outstanding, here is the overall summary:
.
.
.
....

Wow ... what an effort. Thanks very much!

Dec 04, 2006 at 04:31 AM

1 2 3 4 5 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 5 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.