Best bang for the buck 24-70mm f/2.8 for Canon?

Looking to use it on a Canon 5D mkII.

Mostly wondering if the price bump for the mkII (almost 1000€/$) is worth is worth it compared to a second-hnad Canon mkI or the Tamron VC 2.8. And between those two, I would think the Tamron blows the older Canon mkI out of the water. And on top of that it has VC!

why dont you compared used prices of all three?

bang for the buck goes to the tamron, I've owned all three. For high megapixel body, you want the canon ii. You dont want the canon mki, too big and clumsy.

Charlie wrote in post #18092617
why dont you compared used prices of all three?

bang for the buck goes to the tamron, I've owned all three. For high megapixel body, you want the canon ii. You dont want the canon mki, too big and clumsy.

agreed, and reviews here on POTN have shown this to be true....

I had 4 24-70L gen 1 lenses, and was never happy with them, I now have the MKII and it is great.

Heya,

Depends on your needs.

Personally, I would want image stabilization. I for one will not spring for a MKII because I think it's crazy that they didn't put image stabilization. Obviously it's possible, Tamron did it and still made a really great lens. Seems to me like Canon is just milking it, before releasing the MKIII with IS. Best bang for buck? Tamron, without question. A used/refurb is so inexpensive for what it actually is. The Tamron compares more to the MKII than the MKI, and has image stabilization. That says it all to me.

If you want the top shelf, get the MKII. But if you want second best, with image stabilization which is unmatched in this category, then it's the Tamron.

Very best,

How does the Sigma 28-70 compare to the Tamron?

24-70 II is the best
24-70 VC Tamron is second best
24-70 I is the best alternative to the Tamron if you hate zoom ring and/or have issue with tamron in general and can't afford II

all rest is sub par.

I have limited experience of the Tamron - but I was impressed for the price. I can't help feeling that it would have been better without VR.

The Mk1 Canons are variable and do tend to need periodical servicing but they can be very good, they can also be pretty mediocre as well. It is very much a case of try before you buy!

My personal choice was the Canon 27-70 F2.8 Mk2, yes it is pricey, but it is so good that it (almost) makes me look like I know what I am doing! Well not literally but my images have more "life" with this lens an the sharpness is superb. Plus as an added bonus there is no IS to worry about!

probably doesn't focus as well. because sigma

i'd agree with this. knew you would get it right eventually

I know a lot of people dog it because of its age. but the Canon 28-70 2.8 L is a work horse of a lens... I am on my third copy (only because I'm stupid and kept selling the other ones).

its incredibly sharp wide open. far better than the 24-70MK I version I had. and can be had for 500 bucks? its by far, on par with my other canon L lenses... truly a gem.

I can provide some samples of sharpness if you wish.

AF speed and accuracy is stellar.

Lichter21c wrote in post #18093078
I know a lot of people dog it because of its age. but the Canon 28-70 2.8 L is a work horse of a lens... I am on my third copy (only because I'm stupid and kept selling the other ones).

its incredibly sharp wide open. far better than the 24-70MK I version I had. and can be had for 500 bucks? its by far, on par with my other canon L lenses... truly a gem.

I can provide some samples of sharpness if you wish.

AF speed and accuracy is stellar.

I'm very interested in that!

Thanks for the replies everyone!

You have to really shop for a 28-70L. They're very old and it's hard to find one that doesn't have haze or fungus. You will see a few for sale in the $450~550 range, but you have to really look at the descriptions and be very skeptical, a lot of them have just not been cared for and have a serious issue. Haze & fungus being the #1 problems as you shop. A really well maintained one will easily be $500~600, because the market is just not really there anymore, so they're just over-priced. And when you can get a Tamron 24-70 F2.8 VC for $800 it starts to tug at you quite significantly that for a wee bit more, you get a modern lens with image stabilization.

I only say this as someone who shopped for a 28-70 F2.8L for a while, and never committed, because most of them just have too many problems these days, and the going prices in the $500 average range is just not cheap enough to make it a good deal, when for $200 more, you get the MKI or $300 more a Tamron. Regardless of being sharp, it's ancient and if anything is wrong with it, it's basically a total loss.

Shop carefully.

I'd get a Tamron 28-75 F2.8 (~$180~200) and just live with it for a while, save up, and get a Tamron 24-70 F2.8 VC used/refurb when you have the funds, and if you feel the focal range meets your needs.

Very best,

I don't agree with you. I am on my third, not because the others had any issues. I have never once had any with fungus, or haze. in fact, all three have performed exactly the same. I bought my latest for 450 on eBay. its not perfect. it has a few scrapes on the body. but the glass is perfect.

yeah, you can get a tamron for a little bit more. yeah it has VC, and yeah its much much much newer. But I personally like canon lenses. Ive tried other brands, and just felt disappointed. Plus didn't the 24-70VC have issued with the front element falling out?

alright. so the first two are with my current 28-70. the last two are with my older one. They are screen shots, and if your not familiar with lightroom. you can see the original image in the top left corner. so you can see how much I am zoomed. they are usually 2:1 zooms.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/KVqv​K3

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/K9hw​6v

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/L2Ui​eJ

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/L2Ui​Aq

They are $500 or higher on Ebay, and there seems to be alot for sale. However I am not sure I would personally spend $600+ on such an old lens that isn't being serviced by Canon any longer. $500-600 would probably be my limit. Then again, you can buy 2 or 3 of these for the price of the MKII, but you don't get 24mm either. Much cheaper than the MKII, marginally cheaper than the MKI, cannot be serviced by Canon, and you lose 4mm on the wide end... there are always trade offs.

http://www.ebay.com …-vivitar+-tokina&_sacat=0

The 28-70 is a wonderful lens... but it is old and not serviceable anymore. I sold mine because of this. It's also a tank of a lens that does not have IS. I bought the 35 f2 IS and the 85 1.8 and enjoy them more than that beast.

I would not suggest buying a 28-70 in 2016 since there are two generations newer that are still serviced by Canon.

There is a new 24-105 being released in a month or so. You might wait and reconsider...