Tamron, Sigma or Tokina? (28-70's)

I have a 7d and I plan on upgrading my 18-55mm kitlens. I need an everyday walk around lens and I have narrowed it down to 3 choices:

1. Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD
2. Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 EX DG
3. Tokina AT-X AF 28-70mm f/2.8

I have read a lot of their reviews but the problem is that most of these reviews are lab based and I wanted to know their real world capabilities, their pros and cons or any valuable information you may have with these lenses. THANKS!!!

P.S.
I don't have money for a canon L.
I usually shoot portrait.

Are you dead set on the 28-70 range versus the 17-50 range? Tamron and Sigma all make a pretty decent 17-50mm with their own version of image stabilization for the 17-50 range.

I've played with the Tamron 28-75 so I can vouch that it is a pretty good lens for its price. If I'm not mistake, the Sigma 28-70 is probably an older lens? I thought they had the 24-70mm.

Yes, im pretty sure about this range because I need the range. I think I would just buy a wide angle lens in the future. so, between the sigma 24-70 and the 28-75, which one do you prefer?

i have the tokina...it's not that great, i never use it...i should probably sell it...i think the tamron is probably the best of the bunch

Canon!

Kidding. But I have to be that guy: there's a stabilized Tamron 24-70 that should be coming out soon, you may want to hold off on your purchase until it does (if only because it's likely to drive the 28-75's price down).

If that's not an option, I have heard good things about the Tamron though I've never used it myself.

I voted for Tamron. From all I've read over the years it's supposed to have the same IQ as Tamron 17-50/2.8 which is a very sharp lens. I simply don't know much about the other two.

Of the three, the Tamron feels flimsiest. If you can score an old Tokina ATX Pro 28-80 2.8 that would be real good. IIRC one of their early versions were made by Angenieux (sp) a renowned lens maker. Later versions went down the toilet.

I have not tried the Sigma. Always wanted to. But never come around to it. The Tamron is highly regarded for its optics. Some even claim it is as good as the 24-70L. But build wise not so much.

delhi wrote in post #14139864
Of the three, the Tamron feels flimsiest. If you can score an old Tokina ATX Pro 28-80 2.8 that would be real good. IIRC one of their early versions were made by Angenieux (sp) a renowned lens maker. Later versions went down the toilet.

I have not tried the Sigma. Always wanted to. But never come around to it. The Tamron is highly regarded for its optics. Some even claim it is as good as the 24-70L. But build wise not so much.

Have you personally tried the tamron?

Laizen31 wrote in post #14142687
Have you personally tried the tamron?

I own one.

according to the reviews I have read and your comments, the tamron is much better than the sigma but I'm having second thoughts because some say that the sigma is also good and is more specified for canon. Any thoughts?

I never owned Sigma, have Tamron. Great portrait lens on 5d and 500d I have.
Not so wide for walkaround on crop, but better range for portraits compare to any 17-55 range zoom, IMO.
I didn't even know about Tokina, is it something old?
If so you could check lens which was before Canon 24-70 L, I saw them on-ebay.

Laizen31: My experience with the tamron 28-75 is somewhat mixed. It is pretty good when used with the 5d. But not so good with the 7D. I had to tinker alot with MA. It is soft @f2.8 and becomes sharp @f4.

However on the 5d, it is sharp @f2.8. Very odd.

I like it as a general walk around lens. Colour rendition is satisfying. Bokeh is good too despite 7-blade aperture. I have no problem with the build quality. It is my only lens that extends when zooming. This part annoys the heck out of me. Then again even the 24-70L barrel extends too. Apart from that it's fine. AF motor is not as great as the ring USM. Has a slight buzz like the lower grade micro-motor USM.

Have you consider the older EF 28-70L lens? I think it is even sharper than the 24-70L. And cheaper too. Never tried it. So no comments. Speaking of older lens....

If you can score an ATX-Pro f2.6-2.8 you hit jackpot. This is a truly proper lens. Lens barrel doesn't extend. Glass is made by Angeniux. The build quality will crush even the EF 24-70L if there were to collide. I kid you not. Really regretted not buying it.

delhi wrote in post #14143194
If you can score an ATX-Pro f2.6-2.8 you hit jackpot. This is a truly proper lens. Lens barrel doesn't extend. Glass is made by Angeniux. The build quality will crush even the EF 24-70L if there were to collide. I kid you not. Really regretted not buying it.

Have you tried it the tokina? Can it still compete with the tamron and sigma though it is old?

I have owned the Tammy. No complaints on IQ. 2.8 is pretty good but 4.0 is amazing. I sold it because of the slow AF. If you can stretch the budget, the new Sigma 24-70 HSM is great. I know a guy at work with one and he loves it.

Laizen31 wrote in post #14143310
Have you tried it the tokina? Can it still compete with the tamron and sigma though it is old?

Mind you I didn't go taking photos of test charts and batteries, the tokina f2.6-2.8 was fine. Seems to be par with my tammy. But that's via looking through the camera's LCD screen. I walked away because I didn't agree on the price. But have to admit, it felt like a quality piece of lens.