I have a very sharp Tamron 28-75 that I am totally happy with IQ wise. What I am not happy with is AF speed. Unless someone is posing and gives me time to set up the shot its very iffy.
I would like to upgrade to the new Canon 24-70L II but am ruling it out now due to price. Really struggling with a used Canon 24-70 V1 or a new Tamron 24-70 with VC. What I really want is something with good IQ and fast enough focus that I could shoot volleyball with it in AI Servo if needed for example.
Anyone owned both of these that can comment on IQ and AF speed? The reviews for both from what I can see are all over the board and led me to believe there is a fair amount of sample variation for both these lens. The obvious benefit of the Tamron is I can get new with warranty but I have no real concerns about the Canon L lens quality and have bought and sold quite a few older copies of other L lens.
svassh wrote:
I have a very sharp Tamron 28-75 that I am totally happy with IQ wise. What I am not happy with is AF speed. Unless someone is posing and gives me time to set up the shot its very iffy.
I would like to upgrade to the new Canon 24-70L II but am ruling it out now due to price. Really struggling with a used Canon 24-70 V1 or a new Tamron 24-70 with VC. What I really want is something with good IQ and fast enough focus that I could shoot volleyball with it in AI Servo if needed for example.
Anyone owned both of these that can comment on IQ and AF speed? The reviews for both from what I can see are all over the board and led me to believe there is a fair amount of sample variation for both these lens. The obvious benefit of the Tamron is I can get new with warranty but I have no real concerns about the Canon L lens quality and have bought and sold quite a few older copies of other L lens.
I've owned both and in my opinion, the Canon 24-70 has better focus and IQ than my Tamron 28-75. The Tamron wasnt bad IQ wise but the Canon is just more pleasing to my eyes.
FPS Studios wrote:
I've owned both and in my opinion, the Canon 24-70 has better focus and IQ than my Tamron 28-75. The Tamron wasnt bad IQ wise but the Canon is just more pleasing to my eyes.
The OP is talking about the new Tamron 24-70 not the old 28-75
I would go for the new Tamron 24-70... it is a very good option, (in fact I just got one).
There is only one important thing to take into account... It seems that there is no QC at Tamron and it will be rather hard to find a good copy of this lens... First and 2nd units I received had several issues (front focus, soft...)...the third unit is sharp and focus properly...the AF is really fast...you will not miss Canonīs AF Speed...
I have owned the Canon 24-70 mm I for about four years; it has been my standard walkaround lens on my Canon 5D II. I recently bought the new Tamron 24-70 with IS for three reasons( I hoped): 1. less heft ( the Canon lens is a brick); 2. equal or better image quality; and 3. the IS capacity. After shooting both lens in side by side comparisons over a two week period, I returned the Tamron lens to B&H Photo. The principal reason was image quality; the Canon I lens is sharper and has better color. It also is smoother to operate, at least for me. I also concluded that with my Canon 5D II I do not need IS; I just adjust ISO settings. I expect will save my pennies and buy the Canon 24-70 mm II at some point.
I have the Canon 24-70 and it has been my principal event lens for about six years, replacing a Sigma 24-70/2.8. The Canon has exceptional IQ, and fast focusing. Compared to my other L lenses, I'd rank it right in the middle for responsiveness -- which is excellent. I think your choice is between the Canon version one, or the new version II. I expect you could get a good used copy of the first version for just over $1000.
My experience with the Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC I presented on photokina:
- less weight
- faster AF
- slightly better IQ
- great IS
- cheaper
I can not say anything about quality spread because I only tested two, wich both where great. But I can say that the less weight and IS both are important to me. Next to that Tamron offers a 5 year factory warranty here in germany, support center is about 25 kilometers away from my home and I know technicians from my job at photokina now, who promised me to calibrate it, if the purchased copy is not working perfect.
Anyway. If I purchase one (planed for next spring) I will test some copies my dealer has in shelf and chose the one that works best with my calibrated body (like I did with all my lens purchases in the last 6 years).
i own the Tamron because I wanted IS and the Canon is so damn expensive.....if the Canon had IS i likely would have spent the extra dough but without it i couldnt spend 2300 bucks.....the Tamron is an excellent product and I am happy with it thus far
Mucho Betis wrote:
I would go for the new Tamron 24-70... it is a very good option, (in fact I just got one).
There is only one important thing to take into account... It seems that there is no QC at Tamron and it will be rather hard to find a good copy of this lens... First and 2nd units I received had several issues (front focus, soft...)...the third unit is sharp and focus properly...the AF is really fast...you will not miss Canonīs AF Speed...
I've also got the Tamron 28-75, I'm not a big fan of it but it does a job. I've owned the 24-70L previously (wish I had never sold it), I'm playing the waiting game now until the mkI prices drop and I'll pick up one again. In the meantime if I get the opportunity I might try out the new Tamron, I'm not interested in the VC but if AF speed, colour and contrast have improved I might be tempted by a second hand one.
Well I have bought a 24-70L MK I from a member here. Waiting for it to arrive but from the samples he has sent it has the L sharpness and colors I have become addicted to.
My Tamron 24-70 2.8 is outstanding. I am basing this on being a mostly prime lens user. It is actually good enough to eliminate a couple of my primes. I did have to return the first one though with focus issues, the second made it all worthwhile. I calibrated it using FoCal, the recommended adjustments turned out to be almost nil
2 things I don't like about the Tamron 28-75 f2.8. Crappy built and slow AF. Apart from that it is one heck of a lens for the $.
While I think the Canon L equivalent is and should be better. I am unsure if it is 5x better.
Ralph Conway wrote:
Nice to hear latter. Not so nice it needed two copies.
I wouldn't worry about it. It's new and the quality control is probably not up to their usual standards. I think Tamron has a pretty good reputation for quality. Roger Cicala says that they now have a 3 day turn around on repairs, if they can't repair it in 3 days they replace it. Don't know about Germany though.
This lens test video summarizes the pluses and minuses pretty well.
&feature=plcp
I haven't handled the Tamron, but from my experience with the 24-70L original, I'd say the old L is still the better choice for IQ if you don't need VC. My concerns are the slower AF and especially the poor edge and corners performance with the Tamron.
According to the video, it seem the Tamron would be best value for portraits and video shooting because of good center sharpness and the VC.
I'll keep my original, but wish it was lighter and smaller (and IS, of course!).
Comparing the Tamron to the 28-70 II seems like it may be a better comparison although the II does seem to be slightly better from what I read. In my experience the Tamron spanks the 28-70 V1 pretty hard. Plus as you say, it's lighter and has IS. Photozone shows the tests for both FWIW.
