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

That's how much it vignettes at 70? How extreme is it at 24?

The 28-75 is known to vignette 'some' on FF, More so at 28 & less at 75.

these were both taken wide open w/ the Tamron 28-75

so if on the 24-70VC it is so extreme at 70? how bad must it be at 24?! 'or' that photo clearly has vignetting added in

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

After reading the other review, the corner performance problem looks real:

"Strong falloff of illumination towards the corners at maximum aperture"

There is a sample at 70mm F4 and F5.6. The F4 definitely has light dropoff, but not apparent on the F5.6.

here is the link again: http://www.ephotozine.​com …-vc-usd-lens-review-19056

The vignetting @ 70mm is pretty extreme, hopefully it's still correctable in Lightroom, or there is a lens correction profile created very Soon, I'd also like to see more examples to see if it's really as bad as the pic portrays it!

http://www.fredmiranda​.com …/topic/1101750/​6#10584438

dsit995 wrote in post #14339703
The vignetting @ 70mm is pretty extreme, hopefully it's still correctable in Lightroom, or there is a lens correction profile created very Soon, I'd also like to see more examples to see if it's really as bad as the pic portrays it!

Looking at that image of the garage door a little more carefully it appears that the image is way underexposed which will intensify vignetting. If the image had been properly exposed I don't think the vignetting would appear as bad.

K6AZ wrote in post #14339808
Looking at that image of the garage door a little more carefully it appears that the image is way underexposed which will intensify vignetting. If the image had been properly exposed I don't think the vignetting would appear as bad.

Yes to this

I don't think vignetting is any problem these days. a) Lightroom/etc can fix it in 0.03s, and b) look at how people use Instagram.

Adding Vignette is great, when you have the lens that already has it and you want to fix it, thats not fun especially at high ISO. if you have to push 2 stops in the corners and you have a camera that experiences noise banding when you push shadows (aka vignetting) you will get nasty noise in the corners to correct it.

gotaudi wrote in post #14339990
Adding Vignette is great, when you have the lens that already has it and you want to fix it, thats not fun especially at high ISO. if you have to push 2 stops in the corners and you have a camera that experiences noise banding when you push shadows (aka vignetting) you will get nasty noise in the corners to correct it.

Exactly, especially in a case like the image where it's underexposed to begin with. Vignetting IS a problem but I don't think it's as bad as that image would suggest.

FYI, more data from the guy at Lensrental.com. Looks promising ...

http://www.lensrentals​.com …ick-tamron-24-70-mtf-data

http://www.lensrentals​.com …ick-tamron-24-70-mtf-data

Looks good, Appears to be better than the Canon by a hair

KenjiS wrote in post #14340449
http://www.lensrentals​.com …ick-tamron-24-70-mtf-data

Looks good, Appears to be better than the Canon by a hair

15% is some hair, I say

You guys are nuts with these charts. There are reports showing up all over the net on this turd. Yes its a turd. Soft wide open vignettes horribly, let alone looking deep into a file to see what kind of detail is there. Vornners are horribly soft.........NO THANKS

for 1200.00 you are far better off getting a 24-70 Version 1

IS is very overrated at this focal length

Here is a report on FM..This think looks lousy

http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/11086​51/0

umphotography wrote in post #14340980
You guys are nuts with these charts. There are reports showing up all over the net on this turd. Yes its a turd. Soft wide open vignettes horribly, let alone looking deep into a file to see what kind of detail is there. Vornners are horribly soft.........NO THANKS

for 1200.00 you are far better off getting a 24-70 Version 1

IS is very overrated at this focal length

Here is a report on FM..This think looks lousy

http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/11086​51/0

soft wide open? according to the charts, this thing is sharper than the 24-70 mk1 at every focal length wide open... even with the ephoto tests, the tamron beats it at every FL center and corner, every aperture...