In trying to decide on a new lens I'm roaming back into the zoom range of my current 28-75 f2.8 Tamron. I had begun to think that the 24-70 f2.8 *might* be the ticket. It would give me a big uptick in image quality and pretty much the focal range appears to be what I enjoy shooting at...and just maybe it'd give me more of the "POP" in my photos that I seek.
Well, I got into several threads talking about the Tamron and was hearing things about how the image is about as good as it gets when stopped down to f/4. Basically reading "nah, the price difference between the Canon and Tamron isn't worth it", etc., etc.,. "Wow!!!", I thought to myself, "I'll hang onto the Tammy and use the money for either a longer zoom or maybe a couple of primes." But then...
I threw another fly in the ointment by going to the lens comparison page at www.the-digital-picture.com and compared the two lenses. I did one comparison with both lenses at 28mm and another comparison with them both at 50mm. Both comparisons had apertures set at f/4.
The results from the comparison show that in all three areas depicted...center, mid-frame, and corners, that the Canon wins hands-down. The center comparison is close, but mid-frame and corners, well,...I feel like I looking at the Tamron sample without my glasses and just after I had just woke up from a late night (BIG difference).
Is this comparison close to depicting real-life results? Is there really this much difference in the IQ between these lenses?
I'm not on the brink of hitting the "buy" button for a lens, but I'm seriously working on figuring out which lens to go with and this is something that I'd like to find out about. It could be a game changer, for sure!!
Thanks for any feedback that you might have!