28-75 +70-200L 2.8 is II vs 24-70L 2.8 + 70-200L 2.8 is

Thinking about selling the canon 24-70 2.8 and upgrading to the 70-200 2.8 is II and buying a tamron 28-75 2.8 or just keep my 24-70 and get the mark I 70-200 2.8 is. What do y'all think?

If the 24-70 is your main lens, I would keep it. (unless you hate it and think it's too heavy and keep saving. Any version of the 70-200 will be a nice addition to your collection since you don't have nothing in the tele range. (though some people just don't need it)

Thx I love the 24-70, its not to heavy to me. I guess 70-200 2.8 is it is

I really liked the Tamron 28-75 for it's sharpness and light weight, but after a few weddings/receptions in not so great light, it had a difficult time grabbing focus. I upgraded to a 24-70L and it gave no problems. I also was using the 70-200 f/2.8 IS and a Canon 85 f/1.8

Now that I'm no longer doing weddings I almost wish I still had the Tamron 28-75 as a walk around lens.

I'm quite happy with my Tamron shooting concerts with a 5DII. Personally, I see no reason to go to the 24-70. I have no focusing issues. I also really like the 70-200 MKII.

The 70-200 II is a fabulous lens.....if you can make it happen...go for it!

I have owned all 4 lenses.
On a full frame, 24-70L and 70-200 IS 1. the tamron is fantastic on a crop, but the sides/corners on full frame are no where as good up to f8, esp on wide end. also if y ou are doing serous work, the low light af of canon is far better and more reliable. I found the improvements from mark 1 to mark II incremental, mostly contrast on the long end, and slightly sharpness at 2.8. I have a thread comparing shots between them. The only exception is if you are planning to use a 2x extender, where the II does a lot better than 1.

kevindar wrote in post #12034957
I have owned all 4 lenses.
On a full frame, 24-70L and 70-200 IS 1. the tamron is fantastic on a crop, but the sides/corners on full frame are no where as good up to f8, esp on wide end. also if y ou are doing serous work, the low light af of canon is far better and more reliable. I found the improvements from mark 1 to mark II incremental, mostly contrast on the long end, and slightly sharpness at 2.8. I have a thread comparing shots between them. The only exception is if you are planning to use a 2x extender, where the II does a lot better than 1.

Thanks Kevin!