The Digital Picture Reviews the Tamron 24-70

[Mt Spokane Photography]

After difficulty in getting a lens that did not have problems, they finally got one from Tamron (Not Retail) that was good.
 
This is worrisome, if the only way they could get one that met specs was to get it from Tamron.  My dealer told me to avoid it, apparently his customers had similar issues.
 
 
At any rate, here is the review.  http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-24-70mm-f-2.8-Di-VC-USD-Lens-Review.aspx

[Marsu42]

This is worrisome, if the only way they could get one that met specs was to get it from Tamron.  My dealer told me to avoid it, apparently his customers had similar issues.

Thanks for the link - I recently saw even Amazon Germany temporarily stopped delivering this lens since "the product didn't meet the specs" (whatever this means...).

I'm still planing to get this lens since I don't use servo af a lot, but only from a brick and mortar store where I can replace it until I end up with a good copy... as did the reviewer, maybe a "golden sample"?

In the mid focal lengths at f/2.8, the Canon 24-70 L II has the image quality edge over the Tamron 24-70 VC, but the differences are not dramatic. At f/4, those differences become harder to see. The Canon has less barrel distortion at 24mm and has better bokeh. The Tamron has slightly less flare at the long end of the focal length range. The Tamron has more CA at 24mm, but less at 70mm.

I also disagree with the reviewer predicting "You are probably buying an f/2.8 lens to use at f/2.8 a considerable percentage of the time." - it's for use when you need it, for other shots more dof is a good thing.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

This is worrisome, if the only way they could get one that met specs was to get it from Tamron.  My dealer told me to avoid it, apparently his customers had similar issues.

Thanks for the link - I recently saw even Amazon Germany temporarily stopped delivering this lens since "the product didn't meet the specs" (whatever this means...).

I'm still planing to get this lens since I don't use servo af a lot, but only from a brick and mortar store where I can replace it until I end up with a good copy... as did the reviewer, maybe a "golden sample"?

In the mid focal lengths at f/2.8, the Canon 24-70 L II has the image quality edge over the Tamron 24-70 VC, but the differences are not dramatic. At f/4, those differences become harder to see. The Canon has less barrel distortion at 24mm and has better bokeh. The Tamron has slightly less flare at the long end of the focal length range. The Tamron has more CA at 24mm, but less at 70mm.

I also disagree with the reviewer predicting "You are probably buying an f/2.8 lens to use at f/2.8 a considerable percentage of the time." - it's for use when you need it, for other shots more dof is a good thing.

I would not buy it to use at f/8,  I bought my 24-70mmL MK II to use at f/2.8, and if it could f/1.4, I'd use it there as well.  Obviously, not every shot would be f/2.8, but 70% or more will be (for me).

[infared]

After seeing this:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/09/tamron-24-70-f2-8-vc-issue
How could anyone consider one of these lenses? The company blatantly showed us who they are by bringing these lenses to market.  I spent the money (which was dear), for the Canon and never looked back. Great lens that most likely will last for years. If I see the name Tamron I just turn the page...I would not consider any of their products....I also own non-Canon lenses (Sigma & Zeiss) so my outlook is not just Canon fanboy ism....

[smithy]

After reading this review, it's off my shopping list.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

After seeing this:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/09/tamron-24-70-f2-8-vc-issue
How could anyone consider one of these lenses? The company blatantly showed us who they are by bringing these lenses to market.  I spent the money (which was dear), for the Canon and never looked back. Great lens that most likely will last for years. If I see the name Tamron I just turn the page...I would not consider any of their products....I also own non-Canon lenses (Sigma & Zeiss) so my outlook is not just Canon fanboy ism....

Sometimes assembly problems are batch related, and every manufacturer has them.  Klaus at Photozone did not have issues, and he is very tough on rating lenses.
 
Unless there is a general consensus that the lenses have problems, it might be just a bad batch.  It is something to be aware of, and to watch for if you buy one, but not yet a reason to avoid them.  The only company where I've had consistent issues with lenses is Sigma, so I no longer buy them. 

[ddl]

My Tamron 24-70VC went back after the AF got spastic.

I got a Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II - haven't missed the VC (IS) yet but definitely appreciate the noticeably faster AF.

[wickidwombat]

a good review as usual i'm a bit disappointed the 24-70 mk1 wasnt in the mix for comparison to put it all in context with that lens that so many are familiar with

[smithy]

a good review as usual i'm a bit disappointed the 24-70 mk1 wasnt in the mix for comparison to put it all in context with that lens that so many are familiar with

Yeah Wombat, we both have similar gear and I felt the same way!

[Marsu42]

How could anyone consider one of these lenses?

Because it has *IS*, you get *two* Tamron for one Canon, the Tamron has *6* years warranty and good service (like free lens-body adjustment, though of course w/o CPS).

Agreed, for a full-time pro the 5d3 the Canon with better build quality makes sense, but for the rest of us it's a choice between the Canon and a Tamron + some stellar prime like the Sigma 35mm

[smithy]

I agree with your sentiments about price+warranty+IS, Marsu, but when a reviewer has to purchase two retail lenses, then have one of them replaced by Tamron (bringing the tally up to 3 lenses) in order to get one that focuses properly - I don't like those odds.   

[Marsu42]

I don't like those odds.   

Me neither, but the simple fact is that 3rd party manufacturers seem to save on qc (thus bringing the price down), but Tamron at least has good and free service - they do free lens adjustments and replaced lots of lenses for free when the first batch had problems with the new 6d.  So it's up to you to be smart, don't order it online but buy it somewhere where you can return it.

[babiesphotos]

After seeing this:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/09/tamron-24-70-f2-8-vc-issue
How could anyone consider one of these lenses? The company blatantly showed us who they are by bringing these lenses to market.  I spent the money (which was dear), for the Canon and never looked back. Great lens that most likely will last for years. If I see the name Tamron I just turn the page...I would not consider any of their products....I also own non-Canon lenses (Sigma & Zeiss) so my outlook is not just Canon fanboy ism....

Please see this:

On November 10, 2012 at 12:04 PM
Jasmin Robert said:

Hi Roger!

Any new problem with this lens? Any others which has failed in the mean time? How does the one repaired hold up now, are they sharp?

I would like to buy this lens but I’m not sure since reading this report, and now that the Canon 24-70mm F/4 has been announced with the macro mode, I’m even less sure! thanks!

On November 10, 2012 at 9:20 PM
LensRentals Employee
Roger Cicala said:

Hi Jasmin,

No new trouble and no more copies to have the second element problem. It’s really doing pretty well, and quite a nice lens.

[Rienzphotoz]

Even though I own the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC, I would buy the EF 24-70 f/2.8 L II, again, without any hesitation (that is if I can afford it) ... and although I always refer to Digital Picture reviews for all my Canon lenses, I do wonder about Digital Picture reviews when it comes to third party lenses, bcoz they somehow always seem to get bad copies of their first few third party lenses ... I wonder if they are just jinxed with all their third party lenses or ... ?

[J.R.]

I do wonder about Digital Picture reviews when it comes to third party lenses, bcoz they somehow always seem to get bad copies of their first few third party lenses

That's the whole problem with the third party lenses with too many bad copies. Reportedly, the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 is the only exception.

To be frank the only reason I've not got the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 is that it is not yet available in a brick and mortar store where I live. I've had too many bad experiences with third party lenses and never buy them if they cannot be returned if I don't like them.