Tamron 24-70 f2.8 with VC

Hi

I know there's a lengthy thread about this lens elsehwere on these forums but it seems to be full of pictures taken with it. I'm pretty sure just about any lens is capable of producing a nice shot under the right conditions but what I'm interested in finding out is whether or not this lens is up to the job of a wedding.

I reckon the IQ is there, certainly seems to be at least as good as the 24-70 mk1, but my concern would be the general handling especially the AF performance compared to the Canon. If anyone has used this lens for shooting weddings can they tell me whether it is fast and accurate enough?

I did have a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 years ago on my 20D and 5D mk1 but IIRC the AF let it down, though the IQ certainly was good in conditions where you could afford to get it wrong or take your time if you know what I mean.

I dont have the lens, but after reading the reviews the only concern was the build quality and I understand it was adressed by Tamron.

Got one- recommend it.

Got the Canon mk1 too, and I would still recommend the Tamron.

IS/VC is well worth having.
IQ upto par.
AF very good.

I sold my 24-70 I and I'm looking at picking up the II, but the VC in the Tamron keeps giving me 2nd thoughts. I've used the II and thought it was plenty sharp, but I keep thinking the stabilization would certainly help in some of the darker venue where I can't use flash...

I tried it and will pass. I decided to keep my 24-70 version 1. Im lucky as we have a sharp copy. Problem for me with the tamron was at 100%. You can definitely see the difference and focus was slower than the canons. Also in low light focus was slow to lock but it never actually hunted. Just slow.

IS is not that big of a deal with this focal range. I frequently shoot a 24-70 with a flash at 1/30 at F/2.8-3.5 and the photos are tack sharp.

The 24-70 version 2 is a kick a$$ lens. I think its worth the upgrade over the current 24-70 if your looking to purchase a new 24-70. If you already have a nice copy of the version 1...its just a judgement call for you. I didnt buy because we use the primes more for low light work and for shallow DOF. For the price of a 24-70, i would get the Sigma 35 and a 50L.

The 24-70 v1 I had was good but not great. I always had to think twice about using that or one of the primes, and only used it when I really needed something flexible in a fast changing environment or I needed something wide, like for large formals. I've used the Tamron at a show and was impressed -- definitely looked sharper than the 24-70 v1. Unfortunately I didn't use it on my card so nothing to look at 100%. At 24-70 range, you shouldn't need IS, *but* the VC allowed me to shoot at least twice as slow, so the images should have less noise. I'm not too concerned where I shoot with flash as even the v1 was decent when there was good lighting.

Interestingly, dxomark.com shows the Tamron just as sharp as the v2 on the 5D3. Just still undecided whether I want to go Tamron, or pay about twice for the Canon.

I eventually bought a used Canon version 1 and I'm pretty pleased with it. I like the AF and handling and it's sharp enough.