Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 Di VC USD Announced!!! Stabilized 24-70!

[Phobosx13x]

I've been keenly interested in the Canon update of their 24-70 lens, and like many was very disappointed with the lack of IS.

If Tamron can pull their lens off with good IQ, fast AF, and decent build quality (no lens lottery nonsense) they will make a killing on it.

[K6AZ]

Originally Posted by Neilyb

Don't forget build. Tamrons are notoriously plastic.

Try the 100L sometime. And this Tamron lens weighs more than the Canon 24-70 II which I suspect is going to feel like the 100L.

[Charlie]

Originally Posted by Phobosx13x

I've been keenly interested in the Canon update of their 24-70 lens, and like many was very disappointed with the lack of IS.

If Tamron can pull their lens off with good IQ, fast AF, and decent build quality (no lens lottery nonsense) they will make a killing on it.

one thing for sure is that the 28-75 tamron is quite good optically. Compared to the L, I think the color and contrast just about matches the L. The sharpness is very usable, but it's a bit lacking compared to the L. The AF is not as good, but my retention was still very high with the 28-75, so in that aspect, this future lens is very promising. I wouldnt expect it to be as sharp as the 24-70 ii, but if it gets as sharp as the mark 1... my switch would be inevitable. I'de probably wait till prices drop of course (and it will drop), in no rush to get rid of the brick.

[rpaul]

Originally Posted by umphotography

f they price this at $$1200.00,, most people will settle for the red ring Version I 24-70.

I don't know if that's necessarily true, though. If the IQ is competitive with the mkI then VC will be the killer feature that, even if it's priced at $1200, will make it the go-to choice.

[Drewc2010]

Originally Posted by rpaul

I don't know if that's necessarily true, though. If the IQ is competitive with the mkI then VC will be the killer feature that, even if it's priced at $1200, will make it the go-to choice.

But at 1200 I don't know that the VC will be enough to get them to capture the money of the fanboys and make them switch from their red rings. I just don't see that happening. I'm thinking this lens will come in around $999.

[liupublic]

Most likely MSRP will be >$1000 USD, but it will settle to $800-900 after 1 yr with the typical Tamron US Rebate.

[7D_Shooter]

Originally Posted by liupublic

Most likely MSRP will be >$1000 USD, but it will settle to $800-900 after 1 yr with the typical Tamron US Rebate.

I hope so - they will make a fortune.

[gotaudi]

Originally Posted by liupublic

Most likely MSRP will be >$1000 USD, but it will settle to $800-900 after 1 yr with the typical Tamron US Rebate.

They will get my money if the optical formula is up to standards

[Phobosx13x]

Originally Posted by Drewc2010

But at 1200 I don't know that the VC will be enough to get them to capture the money of the fanboys and make them switch from their red rings. I just don't see that happening. I'm thinking this lens will come in around $999.

$1,200 is a realistic possible price because if (more likely when) Canon retires the MKI, the MKII is still going to be ~ $1,000 more.

If it comes in under $1,000 MSRP, and meets the criteria I mentioned earlier, Tamron will not be able to make them fast enough.

[K6AZ]

Originally Posted by Phobosx13x

$1,200 is a realistic possible price because if (more likely when) Canon retires the MKI, the MKII is still going to be ~ $1,000 more.

If it comes in under $1,000 MSRP, and meets the criteria I mentioned earlier, Tamron will not be able to make them fast enough.

I don't know about that, there seems to be a fair amount of brand loyalists. Have a look at the Canon 24-70 II announcement thread, people who complain about the outrageous $2300 price are 'whiners' and 'criers'. Some peole will not buy third party lenses no matter how good they are.

[mike cabilangan]

i'm thinking this lens will be 1k or less.

17-50 2.8VC 600USD + 70-300 VC USD 400USD = 1k (tamron 28-75 is even cheaper than the 17-50)

[davidc502]

Originally Posted by mike cabilangan

i'm thinking this lens will be 1k or less.

17-50 2.8VC 600USD + 70-300 VC USD 400USD = 1k (tamron 28-75 is even cheaper than the 17-50)

I've noticed some additional markup from 3rd party lenses here lately... Especially from the Signa brand.... Case in point the 70-200 f/2.8 OS or the 105mmMacro or the 150mm F2.8 EX DG. All of these lenses are in line with what Canon charges for the "L" line. They are all fine lenses, but IMHO aren't worth that much.

My point being I hope Tamron doesn't get the "L" pricing bug, and over charge. I've always appreciated thier bargain prices

[shaftmaster]

Sign me up! The only fault I find with my 28-75 is AF accuracy and a slightly stiff zoom ring. Otherwise, I love it.

Now if Tamron could only make a 28-105 f/2.8 VC USD... (I can dream can't I?)

[liupublic]

Originally Posted by davidc502

I've noticed some additional markup from 3rd party lenses here lately... Especially from the Signa brand.... Case in point the 70-200 f/2.8 OS or the 105mmMacro or the 150mm F2.8 EX DG. All of these lenses are in line with what Canon charges for the "L" line. They are all fine lenses, but IMHO aren't worth that much.

My point being I hope Tamron doesn't get the "L" pricing bug, and over charge. I've always appreciated thier bargain prices

Sigma 105mm macro OS currently has a $200 off going on. It's $770 everywhere now. Sigma USA used to put in their FAQ that no rebate is possible for Sigma USA pricing. Well I guess that's changing too now.

The market corrects the pricing within 6 months. Most Sigma/Tamron/Tokina lens are 10-20% lower than equivalent Canon lens street price. There are some exceptions like Sigma 50/1.4 but not many.

Also, I have noticed the intro price is quite a bit higher too. Just need to be patience and wait 3-6 months for price to come down 10-20%.

[Buylongterm]

Will Canon ever come out with an official statement as to why they didn't include IS with this lens? Or will the question go unanswered