Not liking my 24-105L anymore

If you have controlled lightning in more than 50% of your sessions get the canon 24-70 mk2. If you are like me an enthusiast who wants quality and versatility of IS (vr) get the tamron. I read many reviews that all say the tamron is only a bit less sharp than the canon at 24 to about 40mm and has a little mire distortion on the wide end (what is anyways the case when you go less than 30mm.

Id get the tammy if i wouldnt be so prime addicted

I have to say, I had the 24-105mm on my 5dii and it never wowed me. I couldn't put my finger on it, but I just wasn't impressed. I decided to lighten my load and sell my 5dii early spring. Since I wasn't in love with the 24-105mm, I sold it with my 5dii. I was thinking of returning to crop with 17-55mm. That same week, the 6d ii with 24-105mm was on sale for nearly the same price as new crop and lens. I decided to try this kit, thinking I could sell the lens and get the Tamron 24-70. But I love this lens with the 6d. Colors are great, impressive sharpness and the f/4 with the ISO capabilities of the 6d make it very doable. So now I think it was the combo of the lens/camera that was not fitting for me.

Just my two cents.

I've never owned a 24-105 but I rented and used the Tamron 24-70 VC for several weddings and events, and loved it. I bought the Canon 24-70 f2.8L II, but miss the Tamron's VC. I keep waffling on selling the Canon and buying the Tamron.

I also loved the Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC, but bought the Canon f4L IS because the Tamron and Canon f2.8's are just too heavy for me to lug around.

dynamitetony wrote in post #17057461
i cant answer your question, but i am also feeling the same and looking to go from the 24-105 to possibly the 24-70 mkii so would be interested in peoples thoughts on the tamron

by the way i have the sigma 35.14 and its glued to the front of my camera 95% of the time, would just like a quality zoom for the times i cant move around so freely

The Tamron 24-70 f2/8 VC IMHO is excellent

https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=17059173&po​stcount=18

jbsg02 wrote in post #17057591
I think the issue with that is getting a good copy of it, I bought one last month and returned it immediately because nothing was sharp, possibly a front focus issue.

This is also true of the 24-70 mkii. I picked up a new copy, it was soft and even at -14 MFA I couldn't achieve sharpness. Sent it back, grabbed a second copy and this one is stellar. I looked at the tamron, and apart from the "good copy" lottery, I read it was a bit slower to focus in low light, and was just a smidge(?) softer than the 24-70 mkii. For what I shoot, I don't really need the IS.

I'm getting ready to let go of my 24-105, but honestly, that lens is awesome on my 5D3.

Had a 24-105 before...it was my first L lens so I was wowed by it but eventually realized that it was just ordinary. Sold it to a friend who used it for a bit and he sold it too...not missing it one bit.

I've used a 24-105 for a year, I've just got a 24-70II and it's like a few leagues above... Not that the 24-105 is a bad lens, I've taken quite a bunch of nice pics with it, it's just that I see it as an utility lens more than a nice photography lens. The colors lack of pop, f/4 is not fast enough. However its longer reach is very welcome, and the IS can be a saver. And as the 24-70II shots have better color and much more microcontrast, I spent way less time editing

So I understand the feeling, it was the same for me.

Reiep wrote in post #17060659
I've used a 24-105 for a year, I've just got a 24-70II and it's like a few leagues above... Not that the 24-105 is a bad lens, I've taken quite a bunch of nice pics with it, it's just that I see it as an utility lens more than a nice photography lens. The colors lack of pop, f/4 is not fast enough. However its longer reach is very welcome, and the IS can be a saver. And as the 24-70II shots have better color and much more microcontrast, I spent way less time editing

So I understand the feeling, it was the same for me.

Its really a downer for me editing pics with the 24-105.. they just dont pop.

I use mine all the time. I agree that it's not really an exciting lens compared to anything else within its range with a larger aperture. f/4 just isn't special. That said, I have it on my 1D3 almost all the time, and the zoom range makes it very exciting, and it is a pretty stellar walk around lens.

The 24-70 f/2.8L just wouldn't be as versatile for me, as the range doesn't compare to the 24-105. Back when I only had the T2i, I had the 17-55 f/2.8, and I never used it because it was too short on the long end.

Certainly, if you're not using it, I'd unload it in a hurry though. Move on in your journey, as everyone has different needs.

I never liked 24-105mm so always sold it after buying the kit.

jbsg02 wrote in post #17057528
How awesome would a 24-105 f2.8 with IS be?

It would be very awesome. But do you want a good walk-around lens, or equipment for building muscles?

jbsg02 wrote in post #17057528
How awesome would a 24-105 f2.8 with IS be?

boy if canon would make the 24-105 in 2.8 i'd get it right now,its the only thing i dislike its the slow aperture on it,other then that i use this lens quite a bit out side most of the time.

after you use the tamron 70-200 and 135, the tamron 24-70VC simply isnt on par with those lenses. The focal lens is rather normal and doesnt do anything special when it comes to people. My copy is fine, even great, but it's strictly a utility lens to get the job done, not wow anyone. Kinda like how the 24-105 is, but F2.8 instead of 4.

yamatama wrote in post #17057121
So Im no liking my 24-105 lens.. everytime I use it less and less, to be honest I cant even remember last time I used it. It just seems that quality wise its not on par with my Tamron 70-200 and 135L, heck I even prefer shooting wide shots with my fuji x100s. I shoot a lot of wedding and environmental portraits and was looking at the Tamron 24-70 VC and the Sigma 35 1.4. My question is have any of you have made the change from 24-105 to the Tamron? Is it worth the change?

Looking at test reports and blogs, it seems it definitely would be.
I've never used that tamron or 35mm myself though. But from all I hear they are better than 24-105 for sure.

I can say the 24-70 f/4 IS and 24-70 II and 16-35 f/4 IS are all definitely better.

jbsg02 wrote in post #17057528
How awesome would a 24-105 f2.8 with IS be?

Not too much for me personally. Large and heavy and surely lower quality than 24-70 II or 24-70 f/4 IS or tamron 24-70 vc I'd think. If I want more reach I'd rather be able to get a lot more and just bring a 70-300L along. With a 24-105 I'd still need my 70-300L.