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!

 
KHAWACHEN
Goldmember
Avatar
1,187 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 29
Joined Dec 2011
     
May 04, 2012 14:34 |  #1411

calvinjhfeng wrote in post #14379294 (external link)
I don't see why 24-70L II can sit at that price point even due to inflated currency readjustment and it does not have IS.

I really want to see what is it going to deliver, i wonder is it going to disappoint us or surprise us.

Isn't $2299 the suggested MSRP?

Street price, they better be realistic and bring it to around $1599.... or less ;)

What are the chances Canon went back to the drawing board and added IS?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
davidc502
Goldmember
Avatar
3,459 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 38
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Tennessee
     
May 04, 2012 14:41 |  #1412

pepeto2001 wrote in post #14379745 (external link)
Looking at those results, I cannot see any reason for choosing the tamron over the canon 24-105 f4....

For a all around les I would agree, but if you need to shoot indoors a lot I'd go with the Tamron or the Canon 24-70 f/2.8.


_
My Gear is ---> Here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidc502
Goldmember
Avatar
3,459 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 38
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Tennessee
     
May 04, 2012 14:42 |  #1413

KHAWACHEN wrote in post #14379854 (external link)
Isn't $2299 the suggested MSRP?

Street price, they better be realistic and bring it to around $1599.... or less ;)

What are the chances Canon went back to the drawing board and added IS?

I'm thinking $1999.00 :( < street price


_
My Gear is ---> Here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bomzai
Senior Member
524 posts
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Bothell WA, US
     
May 04, 2012 15:22 |  #1414

pepeto2001 wrote in post #14379745 (external link)
Looking at those results, I cannot see any reason for choosing the tamron over the canon 24-105 f4....

Well if being as sharp at 2.8 compared to 4.0 isn't reason enough... then yeah, I guess.

Weird thing though, Tammy doesn't get much sharper at 4.0. *shrug* I guess it's good enough at 2.8 already :)

And yeah - corners could be better, but frankly I don't care about corner sharpness on this one that much. It's not a landscape lens :)


Camera: EOS 5D Mark III, EOS 70D, ™24-70mm f2.8 VC, EF 70-200mm IS f2.8 L II, EF 100mm IS f2.8 L Macro, EF-S 18-135 STM, Σ 12-24 II.
EOS 5D mkII, 20D, S100, EF 24-70mm f2.8 L, EF 24-105mm IS f4.0 L, EF 70-200mm IS f4.0 L, EF-S 18-200mm IS, EF 100mm f2.8 macro
Light: Sun, Speedlite 580EXII, 550EX, 430EX, EL-Skyports, Reflectors, Umbrellas, Diffusers etc.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidc502
Goldmember
Avatar
3,459 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 38
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Tennessee
     
May 04, 2012 15:30 |  #1415

bomzai wrote in post #14380081 (external link)
Well if being as sharp at 2.8 compared to 4.0 isn't reason enough... then yeah, I guess.

Weird thing though, Tammy doesn't get much sharper at 4.0. *shrug* I guess it's good enough at 2.8 already :)

And yeah - corners could be better, but frankly I don't care about corner sharpness on this one that much. It's not a landscape lens :)

From what I can tell they are sharp enough so one has to pixel peep to see the difference.


_
My Gear is ---> Here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
montroyal
Member
220 posts
Joined Jul 2011
     
May 04, 2012 15:55 |  #1416

bomzai wrote in post #14380081 (external link)
Well if being as sharp at 2.8 compared to 4.0 isn't reason enough... then yeah, I guess.

Weird thing though, Tammy doesn't get much sharper at 4.0. *shrug* I guess it's good enough at 2.8 already :)

And yeah - corners could be better, but frankly I don't care about corner sharpness on this one that much. It's not a landscape lens :)


well, if you use a 24-70 as a walkaround lens, it may matter ;)

even if you don't use it for landscape shots, i am a bit annoyed by onion bokeh on portrait or close shots...


Canon 5D Mark III, Canon 24-70 2.8L, Canon 70-200 4L IS, Canon 17-40 4L, flash Canon 430EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cliffwang
Hatchling
6 posts
Joined May 2012
     
May 04, 2012 16:52 |  #1417

montroyal wrote in post #14380270 (external link)
well, if you use a 24-70 as a walkaround lens, it may matter ;)

even if you don't use it for landscape shots, i am a bit annoyed by onion bokeh on portrait or close shots...

I am highly interested in this lens because it looks sharper than my Canon 24-70 MK1. I just wonder how many % of the photos will get onion bokeh from this lens.
Sharpness is more important for me. I believe I can use lightroom to remove the onion bokeh. Anyway, that's just me.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
1Tanker
Goldmember
Avatar
4,470 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Swaying to the Symphony of Destruction
     
May 04, 2012 17:12 |  #1418

cliffwang wrote in post #14380517 (external link)
I am highly interested in this lens because it looks sharper than my Canon 24-70 MK1. I just wonder how many % of the photos will get onion bokeh from this lens.
Sharpness is more important for me. I believe I can use lightroom to remove the onion bokeh. Anyway, that's just me.

Just imagine shooting a wedding with this lens though. All the outdoor shots, with shallow DOF and specular highlights, and any indoor shots with lights, candles, reflections in the background. That could make for A LOT more work in post.. repairing onions on 1/2 your shots. :confused:


Kel
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bomzai
Senior Member
524 posts
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Bothell WA, US
     
May 04, 2012 17:16 |  #1419

montroyal wrote in post #14380270 (external link)
even if you don't use it for landscape shots, i am a bit annoyed by onion bokeh on portrait or close shots...

True, but luckily onions are situational, have circular shapes and don't have to have any detail in them :) -> 1 second per onion in post (so you're okay unless you are shooting OOF christmas tree or sun through closed blinds). Could I do without it - sure, would I pay this price for extra center sharpness - you bet!


Camera: EOS 5D Mark III, EOS 70D, ™24-70mm f2.8 VC, EF 70-200mm IS f2.8 L II, EF 100mm IS f2.8 L Macro, EF-S 18-135 STM, Σ 12-24 II.
EOS 5D mkII, 20D, S100, EF 24-70mm f2.8 L, EF 24-105mm IS f4.0 L, EF 70-200mm IS f4.0 L, EF-S 18-200mm IS, EF 100mm f2.8 macro
Light: Sun, Speedlite 580EXII, 550EX, 430EX, EL-Skyports, Reflectors, Umbrellas, Diffusers etc.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,141 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6242
Joined Sep 2007
     
May 04, 2012 17:34 |  #1420

1Tanker wrote in post #14380587 (external link)
Just imagine shooting a wedding with this lens though. All the outdoor shots, with shallow DOF and specular highlights, and any indoor shots with lights, candles, reflections in the background. That could make for A LOT more work in post.. repairing onions on 1/2 your shots. :confused:

it doesnt show up easily.... You have to actively look for it. You can actively look at the "best bokeh" thread and find these onion rings. You have to look through real world samples to determine how much of an issue it is. The highlight has to be pretty spectacular for it to show up.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cliffwang
Hatchling
6 posts
Joined May 2012
     
May 04, 2012 17:42 |  #1421

1Tanker wrote in post #14380587 (external link)
Just imagine shooting a wedding with this lens though. All the outdoor shots, with shallow DOF and specular highlights, and any indoor shots with lights, candles, reflections in the background. That could make for A LOT more work in post.. repairing onions on 1/2 your shots. :confused:

I got your point. However, I am not a PRO. I just want a good lens for my family. Looks that shouldn't be a problem for me.
If I was selling photos, I would go with Canon 24-70mm MK2 for sure; even the MK2 costs 2400. Honestly, I don't really like my Canon 24-70mm MK1. Some of my photos taken by 7D + 17-55mm are sharper than the photos taken by 5D2 + 24-70mm L. This is a big reason I am so interested in Tamron 24-70mm VC.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bespoke
Senior Member
Avatar
710 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 9
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Toronto
     
May 04, 2012 17:43 |  #1422

I tried it today in the store and it was pretty nice, along with it's build and shape. I was getting clear shots at about 3 to 4 stops under with the VC. They definitely got a winner on their hands. Ill probably pick one up soon after I read up on some more testing.


Toronto Fashion Photographer (external link)
5D3 & 5D2s | 24 TS-E II, 24-70 II, 85L II, 100L, 70-200L II, 35 & 85 Zeiss ZE, Samyang 14, Sigma 50
Hasselblads + Leaf Aptus MFDB, Fuji X100, Epson 3880/9890

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,141 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6242
Joined Sep 2007
     
May 04, 2012 17:43 |  #1423

this shot at the mall with a lot of lights at night:
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/charlie617/6994​816942/ (external link)

round bokeh, no onion

probably among the worst offender:
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/charlie617/6994​817816/ (external link)

if you were to print this 8x10, they'll show up, not sure how bothersome it will be. To recreated it, you basically need to go in all the way and get the thinnest DOF you can from this lens. Any thinner, and it's not showing up in a meaningful way.

So to cap it up, if you shoot really thin DOF and print large those same prints often, then this can be a big deal.... otherwise, it's a pretty big mountain from a molehill at this point.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thatkatmat
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,340 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Likes: 199
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Seattle, don't move here, it's wet and cold
     
May 04, 2012 17:50 |  #1424

^^^Those look good to me....Cute kids...The onion is overblown, it's "flowering", so to speak..:shock::p........If some folks like the lens...leave them be.... I say, .....others won't...No big deal, you don't like onions, start steppin'.... Arguing with someone about bokeh is futile, bokeh is subjective when it comes to what you personally like....Some people like smooth as silk Sigma bokeh, others prefer the hectic erratic style....Others start out liking one kind then there taste changes....To each there own...It's all based on artistic value that can't really be measured....

All I want to know is...How is the AF, head to head with the brick????


My Flickr (external link)
Stuff
"Never rat on your friends and always keep your mouth shut." -Jimmy Conway
a9, 12-24/4G, 24-70/2.8GM, 100-400GM, 25/2 Batis, 55/1.8ZA, 85 /1.8FE, 85LmkII, 135L...a6300,10-18/4, 16-50PZ, 18-105PZ

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,141 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6242
Joined Sep 2007
     
May 04, 2012 18:02 |  #1425

I managed to capture this guy with the fast AF

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

20120504-IMG_5922.jpg (external link) by charlie617 (external link), on Flickr

Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

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

409,189 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 johndude835
881 guests, 214 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.