Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 06 Feb 2012 (Monday) 06:37
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

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

 
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Apr 10, 2012 18:25 |  #751

arentol wrote in post #14243093 (external link)
I don't really consider the bar to be set that high by the 24-105. It is very good for a 4xZoom, but it is also a pretty old design that doesn't hold up well against newer designs. Even the old Tamron 28-75 is as arguably as good or better at all shared focal lengths. It is hard to imagine this new Tamron lens would be optically worse than the 28-75.

That being said, real-world testing is called for. But I have no doubt it will do well as long as it doesn't have any production issues like Tamron has had on occasion in the past.

I have a hard time taking this post seriously. 'An old design'? I can think of a dozen lenses designed in the 1970s and 1980s that blow away most of what is made today. And comparing the 28-75 to any L lens, especially the 24-105 is laughable. This is probably going to bring out the 28-75 fans again but I don't like that lens and the variance in copies is extreme.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
mattmorgan44
Senior Member
644 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Gold Coast, Australia
     
Apr 10, 2012 18:33 |  #752

mattmorgan44 wrote in post #14240211 (external link)
I wish I could but being in Australia makes this too expensive an exercise. Return shipping is fairly expensive, but it's the 15% tax that prevents me doing it :(

Sunthing Productions wrote in post #14241583 (external link)
The tax isn't refundable?

Are you from Australia? I have never heard of tax being refundable! Is this something you know or can anyone else chime in here??

That would be amazing news for me:eek:


5D Mark II | 7D
24L II | 50L | 100L Macro
Some other stuff
Can't find a Lee filter holder? - Cokin Modification for wide angle lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tsmith
Formerly known as Bluedog_XT
Avatar
10,429 posts
Likes: 25
Joined Jul 2005
Location: South_the 601
     
Apr 10, 2012 18:33 |  #753

arentol wrote in post #14243093 (external link)
I don't really consider the bar to be set that high by the 24-105. It is very good for a 4xZoom, but it is also a pretty old design that doesn't hold up well against newer designs. Even the old Tamron 28-75 is as arguably as good or better at all shared focal lengths. It is hard to imagine this new Tamron lens would be optically worse than the 28-75.

That being said, real-world testing is called for. But I have no doubt it will do well as long as it doesn't have any production issues like Tamron has had on occasion in the past.

Sold my 28-75 and got the 24-105 ... no comparison ... :rolleyes:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mookalafalas
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,113 posts
Gallery: 51 photos
Likes: 463
Joined Jul 2010
Location: Southern Taiwan
     
Apr 10, 2012 19:04 |  #754

Tsmith wrote in post #14243986 (external link)
Sold my 28-75 and got the 24-105 ... no comparison ... :rolleyes:

This is a little cryptic due to the rolled eyes. Care to clarify a bit?


Call me Al Gear Flickr (external link)
You don’t have to have a great lens to take great pictures—but it sure helps. –Ben Long

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tsmith
Formerly known as Bluedog_XT
Avatar
10,429 posts
Likes: 25
Joined Jul 2005
Location: South_the 601
     
Apr 10, 2012 21:27 |  #755

Mookalafalas wrote in post #14244135 (external link)
This is a little cryptic due to the rolled eyes. Care to clarify a bit?

28-75 often times misfocused, not very sharp until f/3.5, focus hunted sometimes and was slow, cheaply built too (but I knew that upon purchasing).

24-105 (cost more indeed) way better built, IS, sharp at f/4, fast AF and beautiful color reproduction.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Apr 10, 2012 21:32 |  #756

Tsmith wrote in post #14244970 (external link)
28-75 often times misfocused, not very sharp until f/3.5, focus hunted sometimes and was slow, cheaply built too (but I knew that upon purchasing).

24-105 (cost more indeed) way better built, IS, sharp at f/4, fast AF and beautiful color reproduction.

That's a good summation in a nutshell.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony_Stark
Shellhead
Avatar
4,287 posts
Likes: 345
Joined May 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Apr 10, 2012 22:02 |  #757

I was never fully happy with the 24-105, sure its a really versatile lens, but the IQ just never struck me as amazing. Not to mention I hate having only f/4 to work with, especially when I love thin DoF.

However, I think I will be interested in picking up a Tamron 24-70 when it comes out and test it side by side with the L and go from there.


Nikon D810 | 24-70/2.8G | 58/1.4G
EOS M | 22 f/2 STM

Website (external link) | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Apr 10, 2012 23:05 |  #758

Tony_Stark wrote in post #14245185 (external link)
I was never fully happy with the 24-105, sure its a really versatile lens, but the IQ just never struck me as amazing. Not to mention I hate having only f/4 to work with, especially when I love thin DoF.

However, I think I will be interested in picking up a Tamron 24-70 when it comes out and test it side by side with the L and go from there.

The f/4 limitation is certainly a valid complaint but I shot three different copies of the 24-105 and you couldn't tell the images from them apart. For someone who leans on the PJ side of the spectrum it was a perfect walkaround lens on FF and the 1D series. I had two copies of the 24-70 and the only difference in my tests was the extra stop on the 24-70.

Back to the Tamron 24-70 I've now seen some good images of it and it appears to be the best built Tamron lens to date. Its weight falls between the new Canon 24-70 and the old version. The MTF charts look promising so I think it's going to be a good lens. We'll have to wait until it hits the streets to see how good.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony_Stark
Shellhead
Avatar
4,287 posts
Likes: 345
Joined May 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Apr 10, 2012 23:51 |  #759

K6AZ wrote in post #14245506 (external link)
The f/4 limitation is certainly a valid complaint but I shot three different copies of the 24-105 and you couldn't tell the images from them apart. For someone who leans on the PJ side of the spectrum it was a perfect walkaround lens on FF and the 1D series. I had two copies of the 24-70 and the only difference in my tests was the extra stop on the 24-70.

Back to the Tamron 24-70 I've now seen some good images of it and it appears to be the best built Tamron lens to date. Its weight falls between the new Canon 24-70 and the old version. The MTF charts look promising so I think it's going to be a good lens. We'll have to wait until it hits the streets to see how good.

Mind posting some shots? Im really curious on how it looks!


Nikon D810 | 24-70/2.8G | 58/1.4G
EOS M | 22 f/2 STM

Website (external link) | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Apr 11, 2012 00:10 |  #760

Tony_Stark wrote in post #14245682 (external link)
Mind posting some shots? Im really curious on how it looks!

Someone posted a link, not sure which thread it was but apparently it was someone in Korea that had one. If it's not back a few pages in this thread check the other threads about this lens, I didn't save it.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sunthing ­ Productions
Member
71 posts
Joined Mar 2012
     
Apr 11, 2012 00:23 |  #761

Whacky wrote in post #14163963 (external link)
They should trickle out a few more sample photos, or some more info to keep up the interest. Otherwise, I might just have to drop some dime on an old 24-70 mk I to have.

Who knows, I might even like it enough to keep it when the Tamron comes out.

mattmorgan44 wrote in post #14243985 (external link)
Are you from Australia? I have never heard of tax being refundable! Is this something you know or can anyone else chime in here??

That would be amazing news for me:eek:

Sorry, I'm from the states, I just thought it was odd that tax wasn't refunded when you return a product. That's how it is here.


Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
arentol
Goldmember
1,305 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Seattle WA
     
Apr 11, 2012 00:49 |  #762

Tsmith wrote in post #14244970 (external link)
28-75 often times misfocused, not very sharp until f/3.5, focus hunted sometimes and was slow, cheaply built too (but I knew that upon purchasing).

24-105 (cost more indeed) way better built, IS, sharp at f/4, fast AF and beautiful color reproduction.

My post was in response to a post about the IQ of the 24-105, not about its focus accuracy, or its build quality. Pay less than half as much, you don't get the same build quality and AF, but you do get some very comparable IQ, which is what counts the most to many people.

How is the IQ of the 24-105 at f/2.8 again? How about f/3.5?

Nothing to say on that? Yeah, that is what I thought. Don't bring up a "weakness" in a lens when the other lens can't even enter that race. That is a losing proposition.

You have to compare them starting at their shared focal lengths, F/4 and above, and the Tamron is just as sharp at F/4 as the 24-105, at least according to photozone.de. I am sure other reviews agree as well. The color on the Tamron is great too, you won't win that point anyway as it is too subjective a subject.


5D3 | Rokinon 14 f/2.8 | 16-35L II | TS-E 24L | Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | Voigtlander 40 f/2.0 | Σ 50 f/1.4 | MP-E 65 | 70-200 2.8L IS II | Σ 85 f/1.4 | Zeiss 100 f/2 | Σ 120-300 f/2.8 OS | 580 EX II | 430 EX II | Fuji X10 | OM-D E-M5 | http://www.mikehjphoto​.com/ (external link)
*****Lenses For Sale (external link)*****

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
arentol
Goldmember
1,305 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Seattle WA
     
Apr 11, 2012 01:00 |  #763

K6AZ wrote in post #14243952 (external link)
I have a hard time taking this post seriously. 'An old design'? I can think of a dozen lenses designed in the 1970s and 1980s that blow away most of what is made today. And comparing the 28-75 to any L lens, especially the 24-105 is laughable. This is probably going to bring out the 28-75 fans again but I don't like that lens and the variance in copies is extreme.

Bringing up other lenses is not a valid argument so I will ignore that.

The 24-105 was released in 2005, which doesn't make it all that old, but when you look at the lenses Canon has released in the last 3 years, or is soon to release, it is clear they have made considerable advancements in the last 7 years and could certainly turn out a much better 24-105 today if they chose to. That is what I mean by "old design". Throw in how much more competitive the major 3rd party manufacturers have become in the last 3 years, and it is clear that any lens design over 5 years old is likely to be overtaken considerably soon.

At to the 28-75 specifically... see my last post. It was about IQ, and the 28-75 IQ is comparable to the 24-105 over their shared focal range. That is really not arguable at all. It has other issues, but the IQ is comparable.


5D3 | Rokinon 14 f/2.8 | 16-35L II | TS-E 24L | Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | Voigtlander 40 f/2.0 | Σ 50 f/1.4 | MP-E 65 | 70-200 2.8L IS II | Σ 85 f/1.4 | Zeiss 100 f/2 | Σ 120-300 f/2.8 OS | 580 EX II | 430 EX II | Fuji X10 | OM-D E-M5 | http://www.mikehjphoto​.com/ (external link)
*****Lenses For Sale (external link)*****

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tsmith
Formerly known as Bluedog_XT
Avatar
10,429 posts
Likes: 25
Joined Jul 2005
Location: South_the 601
     
Apr 11, 2012 07:07 |  #764

arentol wrote in post #14245854 (external link)
How is the IQ of the 24-105 at f/2.8 again? How about f/3.5?

Nothing to say on that? Yeah, that is what I thought. Don't bring up a "weakness" in a lens when the other lens can't even enter that race. That is a losing proposition.

LOL ... your input is humorous ... :lol: ... better than my copy of the Tamron at those apertures and last time I checked f/3.5 vs f/4 isn't anything earth shattering. What good is an f/2.8 lens if its weak at its wide aperture. IQ compared the 24-105 provided better results with out all the other
short comings you wanna ignore.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mattmorgan44
Senior Member
644 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Gold Coast, Australia
     
Apr 11, 2012 07:11 |  #765

Sunthing Productions wrote in post #14245784 (external link)
Sorry, I'm from the states, I just thought it was odd that tax wasn't refunded when you return a product. That's how it is here.

No worries thanks anyway I am going to look into it now :) cheers


5D Mark II | 7D
24L II | 50L | 100L Macro
Some other stuff
Can't find a Lee filter holder? - Cokin Modification for wide angle lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

407,986 views & 0 likes for this thread
Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 Di VC USD Announced!!! Stabilized 24-70!
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is ChrisZP
1014 guests, 310 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.