I attended a Canon CPS event last week and tried the Canon 24-70 f4 as I have the "old" canon 24-70 f2.8L.
Results were excellent and according to Canon reps, I should be thinking about replacing my 24-70 with one of the new ones as mine was not designed with full frame in mind whereas new ones apparently were, and give significantly better results particularly at the wide angle end ie less distortion/sharper.
I attended a Canon CPS event last week and tried the Canon 24-70 f4 as I have the "old" canon 24-70 f2.8L. Results were excellent and according to Canon reps, I should be thinking about replacing my 24-70 with one of the new ones as mine was not designed with full frame in mind whereas new ones apparently were, and give significantly better results particularly at the wide angle end ie less distortion/sharper.
Yeah, well he would say that! Besides 'full frame' just means the old 35mm film size, which is what the lens was designed for so hardly makes sense! I'm guess perhaps the sensors are marginally bigger in practice but I cannot see it being a practical issue unless you are shooting very technical work.
The comparisons on this link show the Tamron to be surprisingly good in comparison to the Canon.
Had a quick look and the Tamron certainly gets a good press. In terms of intuitive operation, have a think about the focus and zoom rings position though, if you are going to be changing lenses often.
My usual rule of thumb is - if you use things professionally, i.e. they are the tools that make your living, bite the bullet and spend the money. If not, get something cheaper and pretty much as good and spend the difference on wine, possibly women and song.
I did go a bit ff track with my first reply, the point I intended making was that you can get a new Canon 24-70 f4 at around £650 , less if there's a cash back deal on. Don't know the price of the Tamron but I would stick with a canon f4 in preference to Tamron 2.8, assuming wider aperture is not a deciding factor.
I would add a positive for the f4is Canon L. I looked at the alternatives, including the 'mighty' Canon 2.8 Mk2, and the Tamron. My conclusion was losing a stop got me an excellent lens, very hard to see any lessening of results, compared to the others, a LOT less weight, 77 vs 82 mm filter size, plus a 'handy' macro range. So I bought the f4, with the cash back offer at the time, less than £500! I am very pleased with the results from the lens. Another consideration with 'indies' from my own experience and friends of mine, 'indies' don't always focus as well as the marque.
well guys, thanks for the input, now i'm even more confused
i was thinking of the canon f2.8 new version II, but its a lot of spondoolicks.
its available from hongkong (digitalrev) at about £1200, £1400 at wex.
the latest lens is lighter.
the tamron is so much less, and seems to be very good from what i've read.
i'm no professional, but i want my lenses to last for the rest of my life,
but once, buy right.
im very tempted by the canon though.
see my dilemma ? i can feel it coming through even whilst
writing this posting. logic says to me that most of my work
is studio-type and of still not moving models, so autofocus speed
although of interest isnt the main story for my use, but i know i'd
feel like i'd purchased 2nd best if it was a sluggard, and i'd not be happy
with it even if it made good snaps...
oh dear. maybe i take a holiday somewhere instead
The reviews on the Canon 24-70 f4 L is are not confidence inspiring to be honest. However, you would not go wrong with the 24-70 f2.8 L II, a stunning lens (I love mine, it's almost permanently attached to my 5D3) - the sharpness is on a par with prime lens's. It's also available from Panamoz for £1,0985 at the moment (that's where I bought mine from, along with a 16-35 f4 L is and 7D II too).
1098 is certainly a v.good price for that piece of wizardry !!!
i am almost (but not quite) convinced that the tammy is the one i'm going for
but i'm going to sleep on it and look at more reviews.
as i'm not a high volume snapper i will probably end up getting the tamron option
as its going to be studio-based for 95% of its use, and i wont be relying on super
fast autofocus. its nice to have of course, but i wont be using the lens for high speed
sports such as racing etc. so for now, i'm taking a break, letting the brain settle down
a bit, and will dream of nice sony cameras (i've taken a raincheck on the upgrade to the alpha6000
which i think is a fantabulous piece of kit) and will wait for a few months more to see the
upgrade to the latest upgrade (its sony afer all) will have a touch screen that flops in all directions
thanks for all your feedback, its confused the heck outta me xxxxx i mean been really helpful
and i will now turn to a bottle of vino plonko to rest my brain cells with,
muchly thank you's
Was only having a similar conversation with someone yesterday and then saw your post this morning - I have the Canon and it's hands down the best lens in my bag. I take it everywhere and would be lost without it. The wide-angle capability for the street photography I do is unbeatable IMHO, but I also use it in the studio, events etc. It's a hefty price tag though so I guess it depends very much on your own budget and the return it is likely to bring. I use a combination of Canon and Sigma lenses which work for my own purposes. Good luck with choosing
yes, definitely the tamron version of this for me, as inclusion of the vc for the price is a no-brainer,
and although most of it's use will be in a studio-type environment, if i do any handheld video snapping
i'd really appreciate the vc, outside still snaps too !
thanks everyone for all your input. this will also give me a chance to support a local shop
as i rarely do these days, which in my mind is another plus.
all the best to you all, and thanks for all your input. it's helped (but only after the wine )
CHEERS alex p.s. now where that wine gone... oh, maybe a bit too early in the day, never before 10a.m.
I have an older Canon 24-70 2.8L (still have it) and bought the Tamron. I also own the 25-105L F4. The difference is the Tamron has IS which the Canon 24-70 lacks. If you do any sort of video work then this is quite a big deal, equally any low light work and able to hand hold better at the slower shutter speeds is a bonus.
Never had a problem with the Tamron and the results are as good as any of my Canon lenses. Then again I am not measuring it with a microscope - human eyeball Mkl looks good to me.
You may want to take look at the IS capabilities of the Tamron if that's of relevance to you. I can handhold down to one second or thereabouts with the Tamron. Optically the Tamron lacks a teeny bit of micro contrast but has no problems with CA or edge sharpness as far as I can see.