Canon 24-105 f/4 L IS vs. Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 IS vs. Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L II

[heptagon]

Thank you all for the many helpful replies.

I'm going to upgrade from a 550D to a 5DIII (6D probably wouldn't do it) and need a standard zoom. I already own the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II therefore the extra range of the 105 is not all that much important. Having a canon lens on a canon body would be worth some premium however if the Tamron seems to work well it should be OK, too. Robust build quality isn't a No. 1 concern as I don't shoot professionally. The Tamron seems to be OK for me in this regard. As I need more of a walk-around-lens than a studio lens I think that the image stabilization is important for me and f/2.8 is nice to have for lower light. For studio work with flash all three seem to be ok except for portraits where the canon 24-70 f/2.8 II shines wide open. I think I can pass on that one. (For now.)

Sample variations seem to be a big concern but that is also true for the canon lenses especially early in the production. I've read some stories where somebody tested one, then another one, then about 5 Tamron lenses in order to find one which worked as expected over the whole zoom range. But then he was satisfied. Also Canon L lenses sometimes don't work as expected and have to be sent back. I will need to consider that and buy at a store where I know that returns work well.

It's still a close call but all in all I'm leaning towards the Tamron 24-70 or a really cheap, good, used Canon 24-105 if I find an opportunity. The Canon 24-70 L II is good but I think that I couldn't put it to use enough to justify the extra money for it also the missing IS would be a disadvantage in many situations since I usually don't carry a tripod.

[skitron]

Thank you all for the many helpful replies.

I'm going to upgrade from a 550D to a 5DIII (6D probably wouldn't do it) and need a standard zoom.

If you are about to buy a 5D3 body, why not do the kit and get the 24-105 for a measly $500 extra and see if you like it? You can eBay it all day long for $750 if you decide it isn't for you.

I bought a 5D3 body only and passed on the kit and was kicking myself in the head for passing. Fortunately I got a re-do when a family member wanted a new 5D3 body and already had a 24-105. So we "collaborated" on a kit and I got the 24-105 for the kit price. And I gotta say, it's a cool little zoom. Not going to replace primes, but funny how little compulsion I have to upgrade to a $2K zoom with less reach and no IS once this one is in hand for not much $.

Food for thought.

[awinphoto]

Thank you all for the many helpful replies.

I'm going to upgrade from a 550D to a 5DIII (6D probably wouldn't do it) and need a standard zoom.

If you are about to buy a 5D3 body, why not do the kit and get the 24-105 for a measly $500 extra and see if you like it? You can eBay it all day long for $750 if you decide it isn't for you.

I bought a 5D3 body only and passed on the kit and was kicking myself in the head for passing. Fortunately I got a re-do when a family member wanted a new 5D3 body and already had a 24-105. So we "collaborated" on a kit and I got the 24-105 for the kit price. And I gotta say, it's a cool little zoom. Not going to replace primes, but funny how little compulsion I have to upgrade to a $2K zoom with less reach and no IS once this one is in hand for not much $.

Food for thought.

I second that suggestion... worst case you sell it on craigslist/ebay for more than you paid in the difference for the kit. 

[heptagon]

I think it depends on the location where one buys the camera. Locally (Germany) the 5D III is 2750 and the kit is 3550 and the 24-105 alone is 800, so no savings here right now. At ebay usually 600-750 are paid for that lens used.

[Drizzt321]

I've rented the Tamron 24-70 twice now, and my feeling is it's AF might be a bit slower and more deliberate in it's motion than the 24-105, but the IQ is very good, quite high, and the VC is pretty good. Not sure how it compares to Canon's latest 4-stop hybrid, but it's quite good. I do regret that extra 35mm a bit. Last night I was shooting at WitzEnd, a small music venue, and I was off to the side and the 24-70 didn't quite get me quite close enough, but my 135L was a bit long from the location I was sitting at.

Overall, if Canon were to somehow make a 24-105 or 35-105 f/2.8 IS, and it was at least as good of quality as the Tamron or closer to the 24-70 v2, I'd jump all over it for $1800-$2100 or so. Sure, I can crop in some on the 5d3 at the 24-70, but you lose some resolution on your subject. Shooting for small print or web you can still do that fine, but getting that extra reach out to 85-100mm can be very nice.

However, with the Tamron I can save enough to get me 1/4 of the way or so to the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS v2, so I think I'll be buying it in the next few months. I'll keep the 24-105 around if I'm walking around the beach or hiking, and use the Tamron the rest of the time. The 24-105 is also quite a bit lighter

[wickidwombat]

I bought 2 Tamrons a few years ago...

Never again... for me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me, fool me three times I totally deserve it!!!

yeah once was enough for me I wasn't going back for seconds of that dish!

[Botts]

I had the Tamron rented 2 weeks ago.  Liked it, the vignetting was a little strong IMO at 2.8 though.
It took sharp images, but my copy appeared to have the 6D issue with VC.  Apparently the newer Tamron 24-70 VC's function perfectly with the 6D.

I receive the Canon 24-70 f/4 IS tomorrow night for a week long trial as well.  I will report my results here.

I had the 24-105mm before, but the Tamron blew it away if you don't need those last 35mm.

[AudioGlenn]

I own both the 24-105 and 24-70II
I bought the 24-70II even though i own the 24-105 for 1 reason, sharpness at f2.8. That's also a big reason why many other buy this lens isn't it?
Depending on what you shoot, for me, it's 90% portraits, 10% events and for both, i don't need IS.
What i need is a sharp lens.
If possible, most times i'll use my primes but there are situations where a good zoom is essential and this is where the 24-70II really shines..it's almost as sharp as my primes for portraitures..

+1 I ended up selling my 24-105.  Not nearly as sharp.  The extra stop of light comes in handy too.