Standard zoom? Unexpected free choice . . .

I bought a 6D on the weekend, upgrading from a 600D.

I had been planning to get a 24-105 as a kit, but the numbers on the deal that I got meant that there was no kit discount - the 24-105 would have cost me the same as if I bought the lens by itself. Without the immediate cost benefit pressure of a kit purchase, I bought the body only.

So, unexpectedly, I can think about non-Canon options for a standard zoom to pair with the 6D as a general walk around lens.

I had already considered the other Canon options, and decided that the 24-70 f2.8 v2 (while a nice aspiration) is too expensive, and the 24-70 f4 macro doesn't offer enough benefit over the 24-105 to justify the extra cost.

So what else is out there that I should be considering?

Tamron 24-70 VC

If you're looking for a zoom, there aren't a lot of choices - with the 24-105 being economical but a very good performer. You certainly could look on the used market for one at a very good pricce.

Basically:
24-70 v1 used
24-105 used
tammy 24-70vc
tammy 28-75
sigma 24-70
sigma 24-105 (not available yet)

I have a Tamron 28-75 on my 5D nearly all the time. It is sharp in the center from one end to the other, even wide open. No IS, though. I have no idea how it would perform on the 6D, but it is quite nice on the 5D. I forgot to mention that they are about $300, used. Good deal.

If i were in your shoes.. Tammy 24-70 VC

kin2son wrote in post #16459478
Tamron 24-70 VC

I note that neither of you have this lens. What makes you recommend it?

dodgyexposure wrote in post #16460187
I note that neither of you have this lens. What makes you recommend it?

Well as we all know, it's the second best general ff zoom behind 24-70II.

My colleague has one and I've used it, it's a nice lens.

Yeah, for full frame, very low budget: Tamron 28-75 2.8, medium budget: Tammy 24-70 VC, no limit: Canon 24-70 II.
If stabilization is very important to you, then the Tamron 24-70 VC is the only choice.\

But personally I do like my Canon 24-105L as well. When I know that I won't have to shoot in low light, I often take it with me on my 6D, I think it's a very good walk-around lens on FF.

Ive been using the 24-105 on my 7D but as soon as my 6D arrives tomorrow it will go right on there. Look in the classifieds section here or on craigslist, you can ususally find them from 600-750 all day.

timbop wrote in post #16459482
24-70 v1 used
24-105 used
tammy 24-70vc
tammy 28-75
sigma 24-70
sigma 24-105 (not available yet)

I am not familiar with the Sigmas but I know the other choices noted above are very good.

For even more of a budget answer, consider the Canon 28-135 IS. Easily purchased for something in the neighborhood of $200 to $300 used. It is quite good on full frame (a good bit better than it is on the crops). While its IQ will not easily compare favorably to lenses costing $1,000 more such as the 24-70 models, it does compare favorably to the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 unless, of course, you require the speed of the f/2.8:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=2​&APIComp=3

I love the 24-105, its my travel got to lens, very sharp. Great for family outings

dodgyexposure wrote in post #16460187
I note that neither of you have this lens. What makes you recommend it?

Well... i didn't "recommend" it, i just said that's the way i would go. I followed the several-hundred page Tamron thread, from before and during it's release, as well it's photo archive. Also, online reviews. Taking the price and having IS into consideration, it's sort of in a class of it's own.

* While i was disappointed in the original thread.. regarding the so-called onion bokeh, i would have to say now...that i was nit-picking, and would love to have this lens (for ff and if i could afford it). Not really wide enough for me on crop.

kin2son wrote in post #16460197
Well as we all know, it's the second best general ff zoom behind 24-70II.

My colleague has one and I've used it, it's a nice lens.

Thanks. One review I read (I've read quite a few reviews over the last couple of days...) talked about the autofocus not being as fast or accurate as Canon (I don't recall if the reviewer was comparing with the 24-105 or 24-70). How did you find it? Compared with your 17-40, say?

dodgyexposure wrote in post #16462007
Thanks. One review I read (I've read quite a few reviews over the last couple of days...) talked about the autofocus not being as fast or accurate as Canon (I don't recall if the reviewer was comparing with the 24-105 or 24-70). How did you find it? Compared with your 17-40, say?

Well to be frank most if not all 3rd party lenses will never ever AF as fast and accurate as Canon.

Having said that it doesn't necessarily mean the Tamron is terrible, just not in the same class as say 24-70II.

kin2son wrote in post #16462039
Well to be frank most if not all 3rd party lenses will never ever AF as fast and accurate as Canon.

Having said that it doesn't necessarily mean the Tamron is terrible, just not in the same class as say 24-70II.

I just reread the review (well, I think it was the same review - The Digital Picture). Bryan said the focus was fast but not particularly accurate.