Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 11 Feb 2014 (Tuesday) 12:18
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Used Canon 24-70L 2.8 (verson 1), new Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, or keep Tamron 28-75 2.8?

 
rivas8409
Goldmember
Avatar
2,499 posts
Likes: 580
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Lemoore, California
     
Feb 11, 2014 12:18 |  #1

About to drop some cash on a couple of lenses but I wanted some honest opinions. I currently have a Tamron 28-75mm 2.8. It's been a great performer, but I'm thinking about upgrading it in my up coming spend. I'm thinking about switching to a new Tamron 24-70mm 2.8 VC or a used Canon 24-70L.

They both appear to be great performers. I've used the 24-70L in the past on an XSi and honestly I wasn't blown away but now on a 5DII and/or 50D I'm hopeful to get better results from it. I prefer primes for portraits, which is why I'm also getting a 135L to accompany my 85 1.8, but after second shooting a wedding with a friend of mine a couple weeks ago I realize that the versatility of a fast zoom in the 24-70mm range could be very convenient coupled with a 70-200mm (another upcoming purchase).

So bottom line question is: would you switch the Tammy 28-75 for a 24-70? And if you would, would you go with a new Tamron 24-70 VC or a used 24-70L?

**edit**
IS or VC is not a necessity


Body: Canon 5DmkII│Canon M50
Glass: Tamron 35mm f/1.4│Canon 85mm f/1.8│Canon 24-105mm f/4L│Canon 135mm f/2L│Canon EF-M 22mm f/2.0
Lights: Flashpoint XPLOR 400PRO│Flashpoint Streaklight 360│Flashpoint Zoom Li-on│AB800
Results: WEBSITE (external link)FACEBOOK (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,600 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6559
Joined Sep 2007
     
Feb 11, 2014 12:55 |  #2

I've owned all three, and my impression is that the 24-70L can do 24 (love landscapes, but not really useful for weddings save a few creative shots), so if you can afford it, certainly go that route. The 24-70 tamron is easily the best among the three choices. It's a little sharper and contrast might even be better than the L. Downside is that it doesnt have a red ring which may be important in your atmosphere, and it doesnt have the huge size, which has been know to part crowds when pointed.


Sony A7siii/A7iii/ZV-1 - FE 24/1.4 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 - 28-200 RXD
Panasonic G9 - Laowa 7.5/2 - PL 15/1.7 - P 42.5/1.8 - OM 75/1.8 - PL 10-25/1.7 - P 12-32 - P 14-140

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,942 posts
Gallery: 2057 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 12503
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Feb 11, 2014 13:03 |  #3

Heya,

I'd go Tamron 24-70 F2.8 VC. It's better than the 28-75 that you're already used to, but it's better in all ways. Sure, it's a costly upgrade, and it's not a massive upgrade, but it's an upgrade none the less, if you're looking to sharpen up. It's a very good alternative to the 24-70L MK2 which is double the price, while being pretty much as good as it is.

24-70 and 70-200 are excellent for most shoots on two separate bodies. It's a good way to go.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EOS5DC
Senior Member
791 posts
Joined Dec 2013
     
Feb 11, 2014 15:15 |  #4
bannedPermanent ban

I'll agree that both the EF 24-70 and the Tammy 24-70 2.8s may be better than the 28-75. That is not the question. The question is: Is the little bit of difference worth $1,000 it will cost you to upgrade. Not in my book. I am keeping my 28-75.


Bodies: 60D, 6D.
EFs: 15-85, 10-22
EF: 28-75, 35 f/2 IS, Σ70-200 OS, 100-400L
Flash: 580EX II, 430 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mkville
Goldmember
Avatar
1,082 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 216
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Burlington Ontario
     
Feb 11, 2014 16:20 |  #5

EOS5DC wrote in post #16681740 (external link)
I'll agree that both the EF 24-70 and the Tammy 24-70 2.8s may be better than the 28-75. That is not the question. The question is: Is the little bit of difference worth $1,000 it will cost you to upgrade. Not in my book. I am keeping my 28-75.

I am in the exact same boat, in regards to upgrading my 28-75 and to me I'll keep mine as well.


Mark
flickr (external link)
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MakisM1
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,654 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 386
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Feb 11, 2014 17:04 |  #6

I have no experience with either lens, normally I go to the Digital Picture for a quick comparison:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0 (external link)

It shows the 28-75 to be clearly inferior wide open. Actually it looks so blurry that it makes me wonder whether they got a bad copy...


Gerry
Canon 5D MkIII/Canon 60D/Canon EF-S 18-200/Canon EF 24-70L USM II/Canon EF 70-200L 2.8 USM II/Canon EF 50 f1.8 II/Σ 8-16/ 430 EXII
OS: Linux Ubuntu/PostProcessing: Darktable/Image Processing: GIMP

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,600 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6559
Joined Sep 2007
     
Feb 11, 2014 17:04 |  #7

EOS5DC wrote in post #16681740 (external link)
I'll agree that both the EF 24-70 and the Tammy 24-70 2.8s may be better than the 28-75. That is not the question. The question is: Is the little bit of difference worth $1,000 it will cost you to upgrade. Not in my book. I am keeping my 28-75.

strictly for people photography, probably not. The 28-75 and 24-70L were very close optically, 24-70 tamron was a clear notch above and also has VC. TS doesnt need VC, so how badly does edge sharpness and contrast matter? That's what you're paying for. The 24-70L and tamron have much better edge sharpness.

Probably wont make a big difference honestly.

if you want full time manual, silent and fast autofocus, really good edge sharpness, better contrast, 24mm, weather sealing, build quality, go for the L/Tamron VC, otherwise save your money. The difference is 7-900, and you're getting quite a bit for the difference.


Sony A7siii/A7iii/ZV-1 - FE 24/1.4 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 - 28-200 RXD
Panasonic G9 - Laowa 7.5/2 - PL 15/1.7 - P 42.5/1.8 - OM 75/1.8 - PL 10-25/1.7 - P 12-32 - P 14-140

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,600 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6559
Joined Sep 2007
     
Feb 11, 2014 17:11 |  #8

MakisM1 wrote in post #16681973 (external link)
I have no experience with either lens, normally I go to the Digital Picture for a quick comparison:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0 (external link)

It shows the 28-75 to be clearly inferior wide open. Actually it looks so blurry that it makes me wonder whether they got a bad copy...

no, that's about right. The 28-75 is poor in the corners, but center sharpness is really good. With event photography corners dont matter too much/at all. It never really sharpens up well either. I only hesitate to recommend higher end gear because TS has interest in primes. I'de give the existing 28-75 a run at a wedding before totally discounting it.


Sony A7siii/A7iii/ZV-1 - FE 24/1.4 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 - 28-200 RXD
Panasonic G9 - Laowa 7.5/2 - PL 15/1.7 - P 42.5/1.8 - OM 75/1.8 - PL 10-25/1.7 - P 12-32 - P 14-140

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EOS5DC
Senior Member
791 posts
Joined Dec 2013
     
Feb 11, 2014 18:14 |  #9
bannedPermanent ban

MakisM1 wrote in post #16681973 (external link)
I have no experience with either lens, normally I go to the Digital Picture for a quick comparison:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0 (external link)

It shows the 28-75 to be clearly inferior wide open. Actually it looks so blurry that it makes me wonder whether they got a bad copy...

I am guessing a bad copy, or bad test procedure. I cranked both up to f/4 and the results are just as ugly. IMHO, the 28-75 is better than Bryan is showing it to be. If I get a minute, I'll do some comparisons. How about Tamron 28-75 against the 35 IS?


Bodies: 60D, 6D.
EFs: 15-85, 10-22
EF: 28-75, 35 f/2 IS, Σ70-200 OS, 100-400L
Flash: 580EX II, 430 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rivas8409
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,499 posts
Likes: 580
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Lemoore, California
     
Feb 11, 2014 22:22 |  #10

Charlie wrote in post #16681987 (external link)
no, that's about right. The 28-75 is poor in the corners, but center sharpness is really good. With event photography corners dont matter too much/at all. It never really sharpens up well either. I only hesitate to recommend higher end gear because TS has interest in primes. I'de give the existing 28-75 a run at a wedding before totally discounting it.

I think I might just do that except at something a little more "low key" than a wedding. I've got a navy commissioning ceremony coming up at the end of month that may be a good candidate to give the 28-75 a run.

I think the rush of getting some L glass got to me and that's why I started considering a used 24-70L. I see them on eBay for $700-$900 bucks so I started thinking that after selling the 28-75 net cost of it would be $500-$700 which doesn't seem that bad. We'll see though. If I decide to keep the 28-75 I could use the savings towards a 70-200 2.8 IS vice the non-IS version.


Body: Canon 5DmkII│Canon M50
Glass: Tamron 35mm f/1.4│Canon 85mm f/1.8│Canon 24-105mm f/4L│Canon 135mm f/2L│Canon EF-M 22mm f/2.0
Lights: Flashpoint XPLOR 400PRO│Flashpoint Streaklight 360│Flashpoint Zoom Li-on│AB800
Results: WEBSITE (external link)FACEBOOK (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MakisM1
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,654 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 386
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Feb 11, 2014 22:31 |  #11

EOS5DC wrote in post #16682117 (external link)
... If I get a minute, I'll do some comparisons. How about Tamron 28-75 against the 35 IS?

Go for it!:D


Gerry
Canon 5D MkIII/Canon 60D/Canon EF-S 18-200/Canon EF 24-70L USM II/Canon EF 70-200L 2.8 USM II/Canon EF 50 f1.8 II/Σ 8-16/ 430 EXII
OS: Linux Ubuntu/PostProcessing: Darktable/Image Processing: GIMP

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EOS5DC
Senior Member
791 posts
Joined Dec 2013
     
Feb 11, 2014 22:46 |  #12
bannedPermanent ban

I just finished up with it. The Canon 35mm shots came out to 158kb, which prevents me from posting them. I was a bit shocked. I have always liked my 28-75, especially on FF. Let me point out that I am not a pixel-peeper. I shot at about 4 feet, 6D, 1/180, ISO 100. I shot the Tamron at f/2.8 and the 35 IS at f/2 and f/2.8. The Canon is clearly superior, even in the center of the frame, when viewed at 100%. The Canon falls off toward the corners to just a tad worse than the Tamron is in the center. The Tamron is quite soft in the corners. This is all wide-open, remember. Here is the 100% crop of the Tamron. I have to re-do the Canon shots as they were a bit too large.

EDIT: This is the center of the frame from the Tamron. The Canon gets about this soft in the extreme corners.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Bodies: 60D, 6D.
EFs: 15-85, 10-22
EF: 28-75, 35 f/2 IS, Σ70-200 OS, 100-400L
Flash: 580EX II, 430 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EOS5DC
Senior Member
791 posts
Joined Dec 2013
     
Feb 11, 2014 22:58 |  #13
bannedPermanent ban

The Canon shots. f/2 and f/2.8


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Bodies: 60D, 6D.
EFs: 15-85, 10-22
EF: 28-75, 35 f/2 IS, Σ70-200 OS, 100-400L
Flash: 580EX II, 430 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EOS5DC
Senior Member
791 posts
Joined Dec 2013
     
Feb 11, 2014 23:00 |  #14
bannedPermanent ban

Boy, that really doesn't show up too well on down-sized photos. Sorry.


Bodies: 60D, 6D.
EFs: 15-85, 10-22
EF: 28-75, 35 f/2 IS, Σ70-200 OS, 100-400L
Flash: 580EX II, 430 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Feb 11, 2014 23:40 |  #15
bannedPermanent ban

^^^ Hang on, they are all centre frame?

If that's the case, the Canon @ f2 is miles ahead of the Tamron already....care to post the mush that is the extreme corner from Tamron?

At the end of the day it's just another case of you get what you pay for, can't expect too much from a 3rd party sub-$300 constant f2.8 zoom :)


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,427 views & 0 likes for this thread
Used Canon 24-70L 2.8 (verson 1), new Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, or keep Tamron 28-75 2.8?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Nita66
822 guests, 248 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.