Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD?

I've owned the tamron 24-70 f2.8 for about a yr now, its the lens I use 90% of the time. 1st thing I noticed about it was how sharp it is, I used it for about 7 months on a crop sensor body and noticed very little vignetting. I have to say when I used it on my 5dkm3 the 1st thing I noticed wide open was the vignetting that said PS removes it well. I have had zero issues with the lens on a canon 600D however on the 5dmk3 I've had it lock up 2 times, this was when I 1st got the 5dmk3 many months ago. To this day I am not sure if it was a lens issue or camera, I quickly updated camera firmware and have had no repeating issues. Oh and I find the VC to be excellent. Overall I would recommend the lens, it might not be as good as the new canon 24-70 but its half the price ! and not that far behind the canon certainly not half.
 
Sorry for my late reply, I don't seem to get any email notifications any more.
Back to my post, and remember I had two copies of this lens, I'd say the Tamron was sharp enough for anyone's use. I'm not a doubter as far as IQ goes, although my first copy was very soft on my 60D wide open, even though it was spot on on my 5D. Second copy was sharper than the first on the 60D, still not quite as sharp on the 5D wide open.

I agree with Andrew about it being a better price than the Canon, the Canon doesn't offer that much more when it comes to IQ, although I personally think even the Tamron is over priced, especially as both mine failed mechanically so quickly.

I think someone asked for some sample taken at 40mm and over. I'm not sure what I have as I'm away from home at the mo, but there are some shots in my Flickr steam taken with the Tamron that I was very impressed with. Even I couldn't tell the difference between this and my canon MKII once I have processed the raw files.

My second Tamron came from Amazon, and this had a Spanish warranty card with it. Although Tamron were ok with this when I mentioned it to Amazon they withdrew the lens for a while as all their current stock was like this. That's not really relevant to this discussion, I just thought I'd mention it.
 
Even at 2048 res you can see the Sigma is better at F5.6. Good for a zoom though, take anything at F2.8?
 
How is the Tamron @ F5.6 any different in aperture to the Sigma at F5.6?
 
I love my Tamron VC. Admittedly I use it on a Canon mount, but it is sharp wide open, focuses fast, and vignettes less at f/2.8 than my 24-105L does at f/4. See my comparison snaps here.

It would be nice to see samples from those who complain about the lenses IQ because I have no such issues.
 
Last edited:
I'll be returning the Tamron, however not because of its quality, I'm now suffering from the dreaded oil issue on my 2 week old D600 so it will be going back - unsure now whether to pony up the extra for a D610 or to go for the Canon 6D.

If I go for the Canon then I'd probably take the Tamron over the 24-105 L....
 
Orville said:
I love my Tamron VC. Admittedly I use it on a Canon mount, but it is sharp wide open, focuses fast, and vignettes less at f/2.8 than my 24-105L does at f/4. See my comparison snaps here.

It would be nice to see samples from those who complain about the lenses IQ because I have no such issues.
Click to expand...
So in short, the Tamron is rubbish. LOL
 
Tell me about it! Really annoyed, had hoped I'd got a good one this time but alas not to be.
D610 is meant to be "fixed" but would be looking at paying an extra few hundred on top of my D600 return - did consider the D800 but its A: Dearer and B: Much bigger and heavier.

How are you getting on with your 6D?
 
Its very nice, hi iso is fantastic, I need winter tyres though so thats put a spanner in the works, may have to sell :(
 
If you go Canon, definitely take the Tamron over the Canon 24-105. The 24-105 is a very good kit lens, but the Tamron is better within almost every area. I upgraded from a 24-105 and do not regret it one bit.
 
If you have
Gary Coyle said:
Get a grip for christs sake
Click to expand...
Oh, excuse me. Why post soemthing as pointless and goading as "So in short, the Tamron is rubbish. LOL"? How does that help anyone or serve any purpose other than to deliberately irritate others and make you look an ass? If you have your own evidence that the Tamron is "rubbish. LOL" then please post it, as I have done to the contrary. I would expect better from a long-term member with over 7000 posts. 7000 posts and just one like must be pretty hard to beat.
 
Last edited:
Orville, i think i may owe you a part apology here, just looking back and i couldn't even figure out why you chipped in and attempted to lambast me and hence my "stern reply"

I didn't even realise i initially quoted you when i said "so in short the Tamron is rubbish"

I thought i had quoted Chris when he was saying he "was sending the Tamron back" so for that i apologise, i meant to quote Chris but hit the "quote" above his post and not below, silly new forum
 
Gary, Understood and apology accepted. I couldn't understand what I had posted to prompt the initial reply, but it shows how easily a simple error can escalate out of control.

I guess we have both had different experiences with the lens so our opinions sit poles apart. That's fair enough.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top