I own and use both lenses on a 5D. I'll guess the upper photos are from the Tammy, but not without saying that sharpness isn't everything. I use the Tammy when I want a smaller/lighter package, but IMO, the L is worth its extra cost all day long, any day of the week. Both great lenses, though, and of course, the Tammy is a steal for what it costs.
I prefer the out of focus areas of C over D. I think B has better contrast than A, but that may be simply an exposure difference... A and C are darker that B and D. I'll assume the two dark ones were one lens, and the two light were the other, I'll choses the lens that took C, best bokeh, and therefor take A&C for the 24-70, and expect that with a little more exposure, you'd get back the contrast.
Roy Pertchik wrote:
I prefer the out of focus areas of C over D. I think B has better contrast than A, but that may be simply an exposure difference... A and C are darker that B and D. I'll assume the two dark ones were one lens, and the two light were the other, I'll choses the lens that took C, best bokeh, and therefor take A&C for the 24-70, and expect that with a little more exposure, you'd get back the contrast.
You're exactly right, well done. The brokeh is nicer on the Canon, but is it that noticable, to the laymen?
It's odd, I didn't change the exposure or Fstop for either picture, however the canon lens is darker at 6.3?
So, if you were in my shoes, would you sell the newly aquired canon and put it toward other gear? I plan to buy a 5D and 70-200 2.8 IS in the near future, as I am replacing my very dated gear, and the 24-70 is to replace the Tamron. Seems like a steep price for a red stripe.
I guess I'm not a laymen, but the OOF rendering of the 24-70L is just very much more soothing to my eyes. also, if you take some sunny outdoor shots and pixel peep around you will see more flare and ghosting from the Tamron... that said, I just sold my 24-70L after owning it for 5 years... it's just too damn big and heavy for me to enjoy shooting... beautiful lens though...
