Does any one own the Tamron combination?

Does any one own the Tamron combination; Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC and Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 VC? Do you find that these are your main go to lenses? Thinking about selling my Canon 24-105mm L IS USM and Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 OS, and buying these two lenses.

Don't own either, but I would if it weren't for cost.

The biggest problem with the 70-200VC is the price IMO. If you can get a 70-200Lii refurb for $1699, brand new for @$2100 or even brand new on a sale for $1999, the $1499 price of the Tamron is it's biggest problem. I think that is why it isn't making as many waves as it could. If it was in the $1199 range it would probably be a big hit. Everything I've seen from the lens performance wise really impresses me.
The 24-70VC has a bit more documentation/owner feedback on it because the VC and price give it more of a distinction from Canon's offerings (what the 70-200VC has a problem doing).

If it were me, I would do it (although that 70-200VC price gives me less joy than the 24-70 for what you get).

My word the price of all lenses has gone up, but some have doubled in the last decade.

Time was the "off brand" 70-200mm f/2.8s were about $800.00 new.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #15787803
My word the price of all lenses has gone up, but some have doubled in the last decade.

Time was the "off brand" 70-200mm f/2.8s were about $800.00 new.

That was when "brand" 70-200's were $1200. Now the Canon is $2400 (msrp), so the off brand is still much, much cheaper.

The Tamron needs some time to settle after just launching. Sigma dropped from $1600 to $1250 after a year. Tamron probably will, too.

Agreed, the Canon increases are the most earth moving. (and as you point out, leave the field open for everyone to follow suit) This latest generation of Canon lenses, on top of the slow climb that was already taking place, have really pushed things up there fast. The old addage that Canon lenses were more affordable than Nikon is long gone.