Canon 24-105 F4 IS or Tamron 17-50 2.8

Alright, i'm really doubting between these two lenses.
I'd like to use these lenses on both my 6D and 700D , and I know the Tamron 17-50 is mainly for crop sensor.

However, how is the bokeh with the 24-105 on a crop (and FF) camera ?
the 24-105 costs about 2x the price of the tamron.

the focal length of the 24-105 is better for my needs (portraits).
Primes are my main thing for portraits, but having an all round lens with nice bokeh would be great for certain photoshoots (and studio work)

a shame that new sigma 18-35 1.8 lens doesn't have more reach

I'd be very happy to see some bokeh / portrait samples of the tamron 17-50 and canon 24-105

photographykn wrote in post #16338639
Alright, i'm really doubting between these two lenses.
I'd like to use these lenses on both my 6D and 700D , and I know the Tamron 17-50 is mainly for crop sensor.

However, how is the bokeh with the 24-105 on a crop (and FF) camera ?
the 24-105 costs about 2x the price of the tamron.

the focal length of the 24-105 is better for my needs (portraits).
Primes are my main thing for portraits, but having an all round lens with nice bokeh would be great for certain photoshoots (and studio work)

a shame that new sigma 18-35 1.8 lens doesn't have more reach

I'd be very happy to see some bokeh / portrait samples of the tamron 17-50 and canon 24-105

Some samples for you, I've had both lens, as well as the Sigma 17-50, the Sigma being my favorite image wise, but 24-105 is hard to beat when you factor in the length, perfect for a walk around on a full body.

17-50 VC
24-105

Thank you for these, on the 700D it would be great for tighter portraits (focal length wise)

do you feel the 2.8 lenses you had have a better bokeh then the F4 canon lens ?

photographykn wrote in post #16338690
Thank you for these, on the 700D it would be great for tighter portraits (focal length wise)

do you feel the 2.8 lenses you had have a better bokeh then the F4 canon lens ?

I do, which is one of the reasons I thought about moving my lens, many people on this website are for more exp than me. According to them the 24-105 is only a stop higher, and that shouldn;t be a huge issue due to the camera's ISO. As far as the bokeh I believe the 2.8 wins anyday.

Also according to them 24-105 may not be the best focal lenght for a crop camera, if you can afford the 24-105 than the 17-55 from canon may not be a bad alternative, I hear optics wise its amazing.

http://www.amazon.com …ens-Cameras/dp/B000EW8074

One thing I did is get tricked into the red ring hype, tried to have other photographers and hobbiest recognize that I had a professional lens (or semi) when it may have not been the best option image wise.

Currently getting a 85 1.8 to make up for missed bokeh

photographykn wrote in post #16338639
Alright, i'm really doubting between these two lenses.
I'd like to use these lenses on both my 6D and 700D , and I know the Tamron 17-50 is mainly for crop sensor.

However, how is the bokeh with the 24-105 on a crop (and FF) camera ?
the 24-105 costs about 2x the price of the tamron.

the focal length of the 24-105 is better for my needs (portraits).
Primes are my main thing for portraits, but having an all round lens with nice bokeh would be great for certain photoshoots (and studio work)

a shame that new sigma 18-35 1.8 lens doesn't have more reach

I'd be very happy to see some bokeh / portrait samples of the tamron 17-50 and canon 24-105

If it helps, this is what happens when a Canon 24-105mm L image stabilizer lens is mounted to a Canon 5D and used to take pictures.

Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 on FF 5D. I am pretty sure you don't want to use that lens on a FF body.

Sorry, my wife made me take the 17mm shot down. Take my word for it. It is A LOT WORSE.

Why would you even consider the Tamron if you are planning to use it on both ff and crop?

24-105 bokeh on ff isn't spectacular to begin with, not to mention on crop...

if you want an allround zoom lens with nice bokeh, look at the f2.8 zoom, not 24-105...

You'll have issues, as shown above, if you're trying to use the Tamron on a FF body. I would just stick with the 24-105 if you're looking for something to use across bodies; but realistically, I'd look at what purpose you're looking for fill from a shooting perspective and go with the lens that gives you that. Otherwise, what's the point of having both bodies?

I would take the ff and the 24-105 at 105mm f4 you would get nice bokeh, color and contrast.