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

Interesting demo. The 24-70L @f2.8 definitely looks soft in comparison.

05Xrunner wrote in post #13919095
K6 if you owned a 28-75 and was saying 2.8 was soft then you had a lemon. I owned that lens for a few years and it was RAZOR sharp wide open and when I sold it for the 24-70 for focus speed and build there was ZERO upgrade for me in IQ...the tamron was equal to the 24-70L in every way with IQ..so maybe cause you got a lemon dont bash it and say its crap cause PLENTY of others on here will confirm the 28-75 is tack sharp wide open.

Only thing I'd say is he's using it on APS-H and Full Frame, Whereas you are not..same with me, i owned one and thought it was sharp but i was working on a crop...

Photozone backs me on this, the 24-70L is a lot sharper than the 28-75 at the widest setting and wide open, the 28-75 is stronger in the center but outside of that its a weaker lens, the 24-70 is a more "even" lens on a full frame, But on a cropper you're right you probubly would not see the difference at all

The extremes of both lenses are limited by field curvature, which screws resolution all to hell....

I've only handled a 24-70 once, I owned the 24-105, and I owned a 28-75, Of the three I'd say the 24-105 was definitely a lens id own again..while the 28-75 is the lens i didnt cry over when it took a spill and died

mafoo wrote in post #13919030
Quick question, if that second picture were taken with the 5D2, how different would it have looked?

Taken with what? The 24-105 at ISO 6400? Noise would have been noticeable. I've done these tests before but after a number of years it becomes difficult to find the comparison sets.

mafoo wrote in post #13919040
How many of them have you ordered? If it's only one, that seems a little out of character for you

None, I'm waiting to see what else Canon does. Besides, I'm sitting on a pile of stuff right now and until I sell it I won't be buying anything else but this Tamron whenever it becomes available.

05Xrunner wrote in post #13919095
K6 if you owned a 28-75 and was saying 2.8 was soft then you had a lemon. I owned that lens for a few years and it was RAZOR sharp wide open and when I sold it for the 24-70 for focus speed and build there was ZERO upgrade for me in IQ...the tamron was equal to the 24-70L in every way with IQ..so maybe cause you got a lemon dont bash it and say its crap cause PLENTY of others on here will confirm the 28-75 is tack sharp wide open.

No, I would say you had a rare sharp copy. Read the online reviews and especially TDP comparison charts. I went through enough RAW samples from many different copies. It is not sharp wide open unless you got very lucky and even then I would question the sharpness across the entire frame.

From here on out can we keep the 28-75 talk out of this thread? It is an entirely different lens and not one to compare to this, as this one is not replacing it but is simply just a new overall lens. Let's not try to decide how sharp the 28-75 is or isn't, there is a thread for that and this isn't it....

KenjiS wrote in post #13920053
Only thing I'd say is he's using it on APS-H and Full Frame, Whereas you are not..same with me, i owned one and thought it was sharp but i was working on a crop...

Photozone backs me on this, the 24-70L is a lot sharper than the 28-75 at the widest setting and wide open, the 28-75 is stronger in the center but outside of that its a weaker lens, the 24-70 is a more "even" lens on a full frame, But on a cropper you're right you probubly would not see the difference at all

The extremes of both lenses are limited by field curvature, which screws resolution all to hell....

I've only handled a 24-70 once, I owned the 24-105, and I owned a 28-75, Of the three I'd say the 24-105 was definitely a lens id own again..while the 28-75 is the lens i didnt cry over when it took a spill and died

I would have no use for this lens on a crop. Here is TDP's chart comparison between the 28-75 and the 24-70 at 50mm, f/2.8 shot on FF. Pay particular attention to the bottom right of the frame, this is what I noticed on every f/2.8 sample I examined.

http://thedigitalpictu​re.com …omp=0&FLIComp=2​&APIComp=0

^- im not arguing with you mate, Just suggesting a reason for the "Oh my 28-75 is REALLY SHARP" comments which seem to all be coming from folks shooting APS-C.. The center is "pretty good" after all so on APS-C it probubly isnt all that shabby... But on FF well, I'd pay the extra for the 24-70 or 24-105...

You're right, it was very bloody useless on a crop cam..My copy couldnt focus its way out of a well lit paper bag and the build was atrocious... Mine ended up tilt-shiftable after i tripped and my 30D met the floor....

Some people have had terrible luck with Sigma, I've had terrible luck with Tamron personally, Of every Tamron lens each and every one of them has been at best forgettable, and at worst, completely hopeless

Drewc2010 wrote in post #13920400
From here on out can we keep the 28-75 talk out of this thread? It is an entirely different lens and not one to compare to this, as this one is not replacing it but is simply just a new overall lens. Let's not try to decide how sharp the 28-75 is or isn't, there is a thread for that and this isn't it....

Actually, Tamron has a bad rap that perhaps this lens will overcome. I don't see how avoiding it is possible because of the people who own them and want to think that they're 'sharp' wide open and will argue that point endlessly even though all the evidence is to the contrary.

Drewc2010 wrote in post #13920400
From here on out can we keep the 28-75 talk out of this thread? It is an entirely different lens and not one to compare to this, as this one is not replacing it but is simply just a new overall lens. Let's not try to decide how sharp the 28-75 is or isn't, there is a thread for that and this isn't it....

I STARTED THE THREAD I CAN DO WHAT I WANT

But seriously, This is common any time a new lens comes out, Anytime a new Sigma is announced people come in and start moaning about how "Oh it cant focus" or "Oh i wonder if the finish is going to come off" and other things, even if they dont apply to the lens we're -specifically- discussing

In this case we're merely discussing Tamron's reputation, Which aside from the 60mm f/2 and the 70-300 VC has been a bit EUGH for some of us at best and it makes us concerned for the quality of this new lens... We're asking if Tamron is basically writing a check it cant cash here...

I'm being an optimist and saying that this lens is going to be a pretty good value for many users... And I'm really betting its going to be better than the 28-75 primarily because its a lot newer than the 28-75... a lot of the 28-75's optical problems theoretically could be traced to its compact design (Look at it compared to the Nikon and Canon 28-70 f/2.8 lenses, Notice a HUGE difference in the size of the front element? That usually determines vignetting and corner performance...)

KenjiS wrote in post #13920412
^- im not arguing with you mate, Just suggesting a reason for the "Oh my 28-75 is REALLY SHARP" comments which seem to all be coming from folks shooting APS-C.. The center is "pretty good" after all so on APS-C it probubly isnt all that shabby... But on FF well, I'd pay the extra for the 24-70 or 24-105...

You're right, it was very bloody useless on a crop cam..My copy couldnt focus its way out of a well lit paper bag and the build was atrocious... Mine ended up tilt-shiftable after i tripped and my 30D met the floor....

Some people have had terrible luck with Sigma, I've had terrible luck with Tamron personally, Of every Tamron lens each and every one of them has been at best forgettable, and at worst, completely hopeless

Perhaps the smaller APS-C sensor doesn't get to experience the soft corners and edges of this lens. I wouldn't know, never thought to try or ask for samples from a crop body. We'll see how this new 24-70 does.

I reserve the right to make further comment if I see another "I hope this is as good as the 28-75 but with VC" comment. Let's hope it's better than the 28-75, a lot better.

K6AZ wrote in post #13920457
Perhaps the smaller APS-C sensor doesn't get to experience the soft corners and edges of this lens. I wouldn't know, never thought to try or ask for samples from a crop body. We'll see how this new 24-70 does.

I reserve the right to make further comment if I see another "I hope this is as good as the 28-75 but with VC" comment. Let's hope it's better than the 28-75, a lot better.

Basically "Center" on full frame on most sites is the entire frame of APS-C....The sensor never touches the crappy edges or corners of most lenses, Which is the lovely "sweet spot" effect that APS-C users can enjoy...

APS-C demands VERY high center sharpness, Full frame demands a more even performance from the entire lens across the frame...

KenjiS wrote in post #13920468
Basically "Center" on full frame on most sites is the entire frame of APS-C....The sensor never touches the crappy edges or corners of most lenses, Which is the lovely "sweet spot" effect that APS-C users can enjoy...

APS-C demands VERY high center sharpness, Full frame demands a more even performance from the entire lens across the frame...

Yeah, until you get a 18MP APS-C sensor or even more resolution that pushes the center of the lens. I wonder if Sony shooters are going to experience the same revelations we did with their new 24MP APS-C sensor, especially with older third party lenses.

Drewc2010 wrote in post #13920400
From here on out can we keep the 28-75 talk out of this thread? It is an entirely different lens and not one to compare to this, as this one is not replacing it but is simply just a new overall lens. Let's not try to decide how sharp the 28-75 is or isn't, there is a thread for that and this isn't it....

Lol, if we kept the talk to the new lens, then there would be nothing to talk about. There is no new news about the lens, and no indication as to when new news will be provided.

K6AZ wrote in post #13920489
Yeah, until you get a 18MP APS-C sensor or even more resolution that pushes the center of the lens. I wonder if Sony shooters are going to experience the same revelations we did with their new 24MP APS-C sensor, especially with older third party lenses.

If you listen to a Sony shooter, then all their glass is "Way better than anything Canon or Nikon has"

A couple lenses this is true, the Minolta 200mm f/2.8 APO was the best lens in the class VS the 200mm f/2.8L and the 180mm f/2.8 ED, Being substantially sharper and having a "magical" color rendition (Which is true of a lot of Minolta stuff from what I've seen, I do concede I like how a lot of it renders colors) Their 35mm f/1.4 however is... Less than stellar from anything I've seen compared to the Canon or Nikon variant...It is quite tiny though...

Of course the Zeiss stuff is pretty decent, as is the 16-50 kit lens that goes to the a77... But overall I think the reason that most of the better glass can take the a77 is that its also newer, Newer lenses generally perform better than older ones.. Coatings and designs have improved a LOT even in the last 10 years...