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 10 Jun 2015 (Wednesday) 09:16
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Is the difference really this big??? > 28-75 2.8 Tammy vs. 24-70 2.8

 
Intheswamp
Goldmember
1,061 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 291
Joined Sep 2013
Location: South Alabama
     
Jun 10, 2015 09:16 |  #1

In trying to decide on a new lens I'm roaming back into the zoom range of my current 28-75 f2.8 Tamron. I had begun to think that the 24-70 f2.8 *might* be the ticket. It would give me a big uptick in image quality and pretty much the focal range appears to be what I enjoy shooting at...and just maybe it'd give me more of the "POP" in my photos that I seek.

Well, I got into several threads talking about the Tamron and was hearing things about how the image is about as good as it gets when stopped down to f/4. Basically reading "nah, the price difference between the Canon and Tamron isn't worth it", etc., etc.,. "Wow!!!", I thought to myself, "I'll hang onto the Tammy and use the money for either a longer zoom or maybe a couple of primes." But then...

I threw another fly in the ointment by going to the lens comparison page at www.the-digital-picture.com (external link) and compared the two lenses. I did one comparison with both lenses at 28mm and another comparison with them both at 50mm. Both comparisons had apertures set at f/4.

The results from the comparison show that in all three areas depicted...center, mid-frame, and corners, that the Canon wins hands-down. The center comparison is close, but mid-frame and corners, well,...I feel like I looking at the Tamron sample without my glasses and just after I had just woke up from a late night (BIG difference).

Is this comparison (external link) close to depicting real-life results? Is there really this much difference in the IQ between these lenses?

I'm not on the brink of hitting the "buy" button for a lens, but I'm seriously working on figuring out which lens to go with and this is something that I'd like to find out about. It could be a game changer, for sure!!

Thanks for any feedback that you might have!
Ed


www.beeweather.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
MakisM1
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,445 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 234
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Jun 10, 2015 09:50 |  #2

I think that most comparisons are done between the Tamron 24-70 VC and the EF 24-70 MkII. The results are very close in terms of IQ (the Canon being ahead), you get VC (IS in Tamron parlance) and the Canon may have an advantage in AF.

There is a significant advantage for Tamron in price.

Personally, I chose to go for all-out performance.


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
travisvwright
Goldmember
Avatar
2,040 posts
Gallery: 21 photos
Likes: 209
Joined Feb 2013
Location: NC
Post edited over 3 years ago by travisvwright.
     
Jun 10, 2015 10:02 |  #3

Is this thread comparing a $500 lens to a $1,900 lens and being surprised there is an IQ difference?


I come here for your expert opinion. Please do not hesitate to critique or edit.
70D, T3i, Tamron 28-75 2.8, Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC, Canon 50 1.4, Canon 100 2.8 Macro, Canon 85 1.8, Canon 10-18 4.5 STM

Franklin NC Photographer Travis Wright (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Intheswamp
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,061 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 291
Joined Sep 2013
Location: South Alabama
     
Jun 10, 2015 10:03 |  #4

Thanks for the feedback, Gerry. The threads that I alluded to were comparing the less-expensive Tamron 28-75 to the Canon 24-70. Owning the 28-75 Tamron, if there is actually not much difference between it and the 24-70 Canon then the Canon will not be a candidate for purchase. Until I read the threads touting the Tamron (28-75) as being close to the 24-70 Canon in IQ I was satisfied that the Canon was far superior. The threads made me second guess the Canon's supremacy, though. Then, when I went to the lens comparison page the difference between the two were astounding. Thus, are the comparison results pictured at www.the-digital.picture.com (external link) something that represents real life results?

I truly appreciate your feedback, and just felt I needed to clarify that I'm speaking of the less expensive 28-75 Tamron, rather than the 24-70 VC lens.

Thanks,
Ed


www.beeweather.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MakisM1
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,445 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 234
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Jun 10, 2015 10:33 |  #5

Ed, you are welcome!:-D

I've said it many times, the IQ of this lens never ceases to amaze me! From Day 1 that I laid my hands on my (second) copy (the first one had problems), I always stop and WOW!

This example is with the 60D, shot the first afternoon I had the lens:

Full view:

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i37.photobucket​.com …7987g1024_zpsf1​2a1d36.jpg (external link)


100% crop:

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i37.photobucket​.com …7g100crop_zpsae​083ffe.jpg (external link)


The IQ of the 100% crop photo is better than most of my other lenses in full view!

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
Intheswamp
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,061 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 291
Joined Sep 2013
Location: South Alabama
     
Jun 10, 2015 11:27 |  #6

I expected an exceptional difference between the two, tw. In researching lenses I read some users comments in a few threads talking about the Tamron giving almost the same IQ as the Canon and that with the cost difference it wasn't worth buying the Canon. This prompted me to look at the online comparisons which show great differences in image quality between the two different lenses. I wasn't surprised that the Canon's IQ was better, I *was* surprised at the magnitude of it's better image quality over the Tamron. After seeing the difference shown in the comparison, I inquired here whether that degree of difference in IQ was representative of real life results. I apologize if I insulted your intelligence in any way.

Gerry, do you realize how close you're pushing me to the edge? :lol: I looked and that shot was taken almost fulling zoomed out and wide open. The crop is amazing. Looking at the specs, the Canon is a little over 10 ounces heavier than the Tamron...I think the Canon is sometimes referred to as "The Brick"? :)

Thanks,
Ed


www.beeweather.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ephur
Senior Member
617 posts
Gallery: 15 photos
Likes: 21
Joined Sep 2010
Location: San Antonio, TX
     
Jun 10, 2015 11:54 as a reply to  @ Intheswamp's post |  #7

Are you sure that the threads you're reading aren't comparing the Tamron 24-70 to the Canon 24-70? If you go back to compare these two lenses you will find vastly different results.

I had the Tamron 28-75 for a long time, and for the lens that it was, I was okay with the results, but it pales in comparrison to the Tamron 24-70. At the time, I was able to get the Tamron for 1050 (Some discounts / Coupon codes from Newegg.com) while the best price I could get on the canon at the time was a bit over 2k. The price of the Tamron has not moved, and the Canon has come down since then, so the price difference is much smaller now than it was then. It was very easy at the time for me to consider nearly the same IQ for half the price. Now, it would be a little bit harder, with the price difference a bit smaller. Still enough of a price difference to have to think about it.

Two years later, I'm still very happy with my Tamron 24-70 and the IS it has which is missing from the Canon lens.

--
Richard Maynard


Canon EOS 5D Mark III EOS 7D Mark II | Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM EF 85mm f/1.8 USM EF 50mm f/1.4 USM EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM | Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD | Canon Speedlite 580EX II | Yongnuo YN-560-II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MakisM1
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,445 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 234
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
Post edited over 3 years ago by MakisM1.
     
Jun 10, 2015 12:33 |  #8

@Richard. I thought that the argument should be about the 24-70 VC too.

Intheswamp wrote in post #17591520 (external link)
I expected an exceptional difference between the two, tw. In researching lenses I read some users comments in a few threads talking about the Tamron giving almost the same IQ as the Canon and that with the cost difference it wasn't worth buying the Canon. This prompted me to look at the online comparisons which show great differences in image quality between the two different lenses. I wasn't surprised that the Canon's IQ was better, I *was* surprised at the magnitude of it's better image quality over the Tamron. After seeing the difference shown in the comparison, I inquired here whether that degree of difference in IQ was representative of real life results. I apologize if I insulted your intelligence in any way.

Gerry, do you realize how close you're pushing me to the edge? :lol: I looked and that shot was taken almost fulling zoomed out and wide open. The crop is amazing. Looking at the specs, the Canon is a little over 10 ounces heavier than the Tamron...I think the Canon is sometimes referred to as "The Brick"? :)

Thanks,
Ed

Ed, the 'Brick' was the first edition of the EF 24-70 as it was rather heavy.

A lot of people speak in glowing terms about the Tamron 28-75 based on its center performance (possibly on a crop). I never thought of it as a contender.

The Tamron 24-70 VC with its lower price (at this moment $1199 new vs $1799 new for the Canon) and its VC and IQ and AF approaching the Canon, but not quite there, is the comparison to think about.

Personally, getting the EF 70-200 MkII was a revelation on what modern zooms can offer in the IQ department. After that, I was hungry to repeat the experience with the EF 24-70 MkII. Then, I decided to buy a FF to do justice to these lenses. Now, I want the EF 100-400 MkII.

It's a slippery slope! :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
Intheswamp
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,061 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 291
Joined Sep 2013
Location: South Alabama
     
Jun 10, 2015 13:02 |  #9

Thanks for the reply, Richard. There are several threads with comments in them stating that the 28-75 Tamron can run with the 24-70. Also, whether they're speaking of the 24-70 v1 or v2 is irrelevant in what I'm asking. Though I mentioned the comments, my questions are not pointed towards those comments but rather to the results from the lens comparison at www.the-digital.picture.com (external link) that the comments prompted me to check out. My question being....is there really this much difference between the two lenses?

I haven't looked at the 24-70 Tamron, but I will before I decide. As you noted, with the smaller price difference it makes for a harder decision should I go this focal range zoom. Thanks for mentioning it!

Ed


www.beeweather.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
14,634 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 4920
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jun 10, 2015 14:52 |  #10

why are you comparing at F4? you buy a 2.8 lens to shoot 2.8, otherwise stick with an F4 lens. The new 24-70 is substantially better than the old 28-75. Sharper all the way to the corners wide open, any focal length, and stabilization for consistent results. AF ability also another league.

the only thing going for the 28-75 is price point, which is fitting.


Sony A7rii/A7riii - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ephur
Senior Member
617 posts
Gallery: 15 photos
Likes: 21
Joined Sep 2010
Location: San Antonio, TX
     
Jun 10, 2015 15:34 as a reply to  @ Intheswamp's post |  #11

Well, I used the 28-75 for about two years, for well over half my shots.

It was a great lens, and I got some really fine pictures. I like the color reproduction, and it's sharp enough. The following shots are both with the 28-75. I don't think that it competes with either of the canon 24-70's or the Tamron 24-70 and haven't seen a lot of people say that it does in terms of 'raw' sharpness. In terms of capturing great images, and being more than sharp enough, definitely!

IMAGE: https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2844/9521969788_c7acb7eb45_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/fvqz​SU  (external link) 20130720_0063-119.jpg (external link) by Richard (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5067/5597333224_0eaf147a56_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/9wBN​af  (external link) Which Way? (external link) by Richard (external link), on Flickr

Canon EOS 5D Mark III EOS 7D Mark II | Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM EF 85mm f/1.8 USM EF 50mm f/1.4 USM EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM | Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD | Canon Speedlite 580EX II | Yongnuo YN-560-II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Intheswamp
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,061 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 291
Joined Sep 2013
Location: South Alabama
     
Jun 10, 2015 17:14 |  #12

Charlie wrote in post #17591771 (external link)
why are you comparing at F4? you buy a 2.8 lens to shoot 2.8, otherwise stick with an F4 lens. The new 24-70 is substantially better than the old 28-75. Sharper all the way to the corners wide open, any focal length, and stabilization for consistent results. AF ability also another league.

the only thing going for the 28-75 is price point, which is fitting.

Charlie, I guess the reason I looked at F4 was because that is where it was said the Tamron's sweetest spot was...I figured I'd give it the benefit of it being at it's "best". I also looked at F2.8 and have a link to that comparison in my original post. You do realize that with your comments you are also pushing me closer to the edge? :-)

Ephur wrote in post #17591832 (external link)
Well, I used the 28-75 for about two years, for well over half my shots.

It was a great lens, and I got some really fine pictures. I like the color reproduction, and it's sharp enough. The following shots are both with the 28-75. I don't think that it competes with either of the canon 24-70's or the Tamron 24-70 and haven't seen a lot of people say that it does in terms of 'raw' sharpness. In terms of capturing great images, and being more than sharp enough, definitely!

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/fvqz​SU  (external link) 20130720_0063-119.jpg (external link) by Richard (external link), on Flickr

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/9wBN​af  (external link) Which Way? (external link) by Richard (external link), on Flickr

Richard, that looks like some_kind_of_crew that you've got there!!! :lol: Great shots with the Tamron! Yes, I've made some good sharp shots with mine and it's my most used lens. Most likely my problem is *me*...that's why I'm trying to ease along with my lens selection. Your post got me to thinking...I could use the Tamron on my old T2i and sell the 17-55 that's on it now...put the proceeds against the 24-70 (if that's what I end up buying). It would be an odd zoom on the T2i...crop-factor 45-120mm. -? The Tamron has served me well but I'm looking to raise the glass and (hopefully) image quality for my 6D.

Ed


www.beeweather.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Intheswamp
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,061 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 291
Joined Sep 2013
Location: South Alabama
     
Jun 10, 2015 17:17 |  #13

I just want to say that I appreciate all the comments. If I come across as sounding short or abrupt I guess it's my inexperience in dealing with this level of lenses and nervousness in discussing something that will be a BIG decision for me. I truly am thankful for *each* of your comments and advice.

Ed


www.beeweather.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phantelope
Goldmember
Avatar
1,889 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 39
Joined Sep 2008
Location: NorCal
     
Jun 10, 2015 18:14 |  #14

I have the Tammy and have absolutely no issues with it. I usually buy Canon but here the (back then) difference of about $1k made no sense at all and I bought several other lenses with the saved money, also non-canon. I don't care what's written on the lens or who makes it, I care about price and performance. And here the Tammy won. I also would not buy any lens in that mm range that does not have IS.


40D, 5D3, a bunch of lenses and other things :cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
heathermc72
Member
59 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2014
     
Jun 10, 2015 18:39 |  #15

You mention that you already own the canon 17-55. That lens is one of the best lenses you can put on your crop camera. I think that even if you bought the best, the Canon 24-70 II, the iq difference would not justify the amount of money spent on the upgrade. I think if you're looking at these high end lenses, then you should be considering going full frame.




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

2,376 views & 1 like for this thread
Is the difference really this big??? > 28-75 2.8 Tammy vs. 24-70 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 alexjmck
418 guests, 367 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.