Gear Talk > Third Party Manufacturers
Tamron introduces 24-70mm f/2.8 with IS
bycostello:
--- Quote from: dbase on February 07, 2012, 02:52:21 PM ---I dont know why everyone still harps on about IS
I do not even think its necessary these days, the 5d mk II has good higher iso & no doubt
the 1dx and the upcoming mk III will exceed the previous versions
in any case, looking forward to this lens as on a budget. my guess is around 1600 at launch
--- End quote ---
noise is noise.... i want to use the lowest iso possible...
bycostello:
i'm told that the shorter the focal length the harder it is to put IS on a lens so a canon 24-70IS would be both physically large and expensive (although tamron are maybe saying it isn't the case).... it is the one upgrade i'd make in a flash though if canon ever make one...
dilbert:
--- Quote from: Viggo on April 20, 2012, 02:18:50 AM ---
--- Quote from: Wideopen on April 10, 2012, 12:31:40 PM ---Cant wait to see how till this will compete against canons 24-70L II. My tamron 28-75 comes pretty close to my 24-70L
--- End quote ---
Here's a special site just for the 24-70 Tamoron. And as pointed out by others, all shots at 5,6 or narrower, not very comforting.
http://www.tamron.co.jp/en/lineup/a007/index.html
--- End quote ---
All the shots are at 5,6 because otherwise parts of the shots would be out of focus.
The photographs were taken by a professional photographer who is showing what the lens can do. There's more to any lens than what it can shoot at maximum aperture.
If any of those photos had of been taken at 2.8 then critical parts of the subject matter would have been out of focus. Seems to me that people criticising the lack of 2.8 pics are arm chair internet experts rather than photographers.
dilbert:
--- Quote from: eirikv on April 24, 2012, 02:44:41 AM ---A review of this lens:
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/tamron-sp-24-70mm-f-2-8-vc-usd-lens-review-19056
--- End quote ---
The graphs look pretty normal - peak in lens resolution at somewhere around f/5.6 to f/8.0. For a landscape shot, at f/8 or f/11, it's going to be pretty damn good.
Interestingly, even though the center peaks at 8.0, it is also at around this point when the entire image is of similar resolution - exactly what you want and need for a good landscape shot.
To read the graph in a different manner, if you're shooting portrait at 2.8, looking for nice bokeh with your subject centered then the drop off in resolution towards the edge is not going to harm the picture at all.
D.Sim:
--- Quote from: dilbert on April 26, 2012, 05:41:27 AM ---
--- Quote from: Viggo on April 20, 2012, 02:18:50 AM ---
--- Quote from: Wideopen on April 10, 2012, 12:31:40 PM ---Cant wait to see how till this will compete against canons 24-70L II. My tamron 28-75 comes pretty close to my 24-70L
--- End quote ---
Here's a special site just for the 24-70 Tamoron. And as pointed out by others, all shots at 5,6 or narrower, not very comforting.
http://www.tamron.co.jp/en/lineup/a007/index.html
--- End quote ---
All the shots are at 5,6 because otherwise parts of the shots would be out of focus.
The photographs were taken by a professional photographer who is showing what the lens can do. There's more to any lens than what it can shoot at maximum aperture.
If any of those photos had of been taken at 2.8 then critical parts of the subject matter would have been out of focus. Seems to me that people criticising the lack of 2.8 pics are arm chair internet experts rather than photographers.
--- End quote ---
Thing is though - people want to know what it can do at maximum aperture as well... if you're only going to shoot it stopped down, you're not competing against the L lenses, you're going up against the lesser lenses with smaller apertures...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version