Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review

[cliffwang]

Also, the resolution figures seem to indicate the lens performs better at the wide end. CA is well controlled as well... Though there is this onion-like oof blur in the sample shot at f/2.8 - not sure what to make of that...

The comment from the original website.

"The concentric rings are caused by a water droplet on the front element as it was beginning to rain"

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/tamron-sp-24-70mm-f-2-8-vc-usd-lens-review-19056

[squarebox]

I currently have the Canon 24-70mkII pre-ordered... but this is looking very tempting. 

How do Tamrons hold up for resale value?

[michi]

I currently have the Canon 24-70mkII pre-ordered... but this is looking very tempting. 

How do Tamrons hold up for resale value?

Generally they are nowhere near an original Canon lens (which hardly loses any value).  However, if it turns out to be a gem, it might hold its value pretty well. 

Still looking for someone with Tamron customer service experience to tell us how they handle issues.

[dswatson83]

I have been torn between the Canon 24-70 & 24-105 IS. Which do I need more, the IS or f/2.8? Since I have never had a bride complain about the sharpness of the 24-70mm f/2.8 (which I rent for now), I really don't see the need to get version II at this point. I would much prefer to see stabilization and was hoping to see this on the new 24-70 which is why I was waiting to purchase it. Now I am leaning towards the Tamron

[mjardeen]

So this last weekend I got to handle and take a few shots with this lens at a local store. I have to say that I am really impressed, to the point that I may sell my 24-105 and spend the extra cash to get one.

Size is at a sweet point, it did not seems all that heavy on my 5D mk1, but then I use it with the battery grip. The effect of the VC was obvious when I looked through the lens. The build feels solid. The real test will be images. I am not posting any of the few images I shot because frankly they sucked not because of the lens but because a setting error on my part. I plan on taking one out to test shoot.

[AJ]

More samples here
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1108651

Looks like it's sharp, very effective VC, good AF, decent bokeh, hefty vignetting.

[dswatson83]

More samples here
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1108651
Looks like it's sharp, very effective VC, good AF, decent bokeh, hefty vignetting.

Thanks for the site. Looks good but yeah, that vignetting is massive. This looks like a great lens on a cropped body and a good lens for the FF users. Of course, since Canon won't make a similar lens with IS, it looks like the choice is between vignetting and IS. I think I would prefer IS since lighroom traditionally does a decent job getting rid of vignetting

[cliffwang]

More samples here
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1108651
Looks like it's sharp, very effective VC, good AF, decent bokeh, hefty vignetting.

Thanks for the site. Looks good but yeah, that vignetting is massive. This looks like a great lens on a cropped body and a good lens for the FF users. Of course, since Canon won't make a similar lens with IS, it looks like the choice is between vignetting and IS. I think I would prefer IS since lighroom traditionally does a decent job getting rid of vignetting

Learned something here.  I haven't thought about rid of vignetting by software.

[Marsu42]

Learned something here.  I haven't thought about rid of vignetting by software.

Nowadays, vignetting, distortion and even chromatic aberrations (LR 4.1 rc2 just improved the latter even more) are not an issue anymore because they are easily corrected. The real quality markers of a digital lens are sharpness & color rendition and next to that build quality, af & image stabilization.

[dstppy]

It's great everyone is so supportive of Canon's efforts 

Hrm, is this her or another one?
http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/lenses/normal-range/tamron-24-70mm-f2.8-di-vc-for-canon

[well_dunno]

"ISO 12233 resolution chart results have been added to the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens Review page.
[...]
Before making your purchase decision, I encourage you to wait for me to spend more time evaluating the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens' AF performance. Neither of the two lenses I have autofocus accurately on the test chart using a Canon-calibrated EOS 1Ds Mark III. I will minimally test the second lens behind a second calibrated 1Ds III and a 5D III."

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=2357

The corners do not look good at all... Even if it is a bad copy issue, two out of two is not very encouraging... Let's hope it performs better on the other bodies on which it is going to be tested...

Cheers!

[SR20DEN]

"ISO 12233 resolution chart results have been added to the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens Review page.
[...]
Before making your purchase decision, I encourage you to wait for me to spend more time evaluating the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens' AF performance. Neither of the two lenses I have autofocus accurately on the test chart using a Canon-calibrated EOS 1Ds Mark III. I will minimally test the second lens behind a second calibrated 1Ds III and a 5D III."

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=2357

The corners do not look good at all... Even if it is a bad copy issue, two out of two is not very encouraging... Let's hope it performs better on the other bodies on which it is going to be tested...

Cheers!

Many if not most of his Tamron lens reviews involve him sending back a copy or two. I had high hopes for this lens but I was holding out for that exact review and I am not surprised at the outcome.
 Because of my personal experience with the only  Tamron lens I own(18-270) and after finding that site some time ago, I never purchase a lens without first studying those ISO 12233 image crops.  I, like most people, do not have the equipment needed to do that type of testing. Therefore I won't take the gamble of buying anymore third party lenses and hoping that I get a good copy.

[dilbert]

"ISO 12233 resolution chart results have been added to the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens Review page.
[...]
Before making your purchase decision, I encourage you to wait for me to spend more time evaluating the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens' AF performance. Neither of the two lenses I have autofocus accurately on the test chart using a Canon-calibrated EOS 1Ds Mark III. I will minimally test the second lens behind a second calibrated 1Ds III and a 5D III."

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=2357

The corners do not look good at all... Even if it is a bad copy issue, two out of two is not very encouraging... Let's hope it performs better on the other bodies on which it is going to be tested...

So does this guy get paid by Canon to review pictures?
Or receiver sponsorship from Canon?
Free services from Canon?

The reason that I ask is that the above comments are pretty damning about his understanding of what it means for a lens and camera body to be accurately aligned.

I've had my Canon cameras calibrated by Canon (a service for which I paid for) and I still needed to use AFMA with any Canon lens that I hadn't sent to Canon for simultaneous calibration. So just because a lens has the word "Canon" on it means nothing with respect to its ability to accurately autofocus.

If the above tester doesn't use or understand why AFMA is appropriate and how to use it then you should take that as an indication that the reviewer is not very sophisticated and doesn't know what they are doing.

[SR20DEN]

So does this guy get paid by Canon to review pictures?
Or receiver sponsorship from Canon?
Free services from Canon?

The reason that I ask is that the above comments are pretty damning about his understanding of what it means for a lens and camera body to be accurately aligned.

I've had my Canon cameras calibrated by Canon (a service for which I paid for) and I still needed to use AFMA with any Canon lens that I hadn't sent to Canon for simultaneous calibration. So just because a lens has the word "Canon" on it means nothing with respect to its ability to accurately autofocus.

If the above tester doesn't use or understand why AFMA is appropriate and how to use it then you should take that as an indication that the reviewer is not very sophisticated and doesn't know what they are doing.

After simple search on the site;
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/AF-Microadjustment-Tips.aspx


Another simple search reveals exactly how he conducts these tests.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Help/ISO-12233.aspx

[elflord]

Another simple search reveals exactly how he conducts these tests.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Help/ISO-12233.aspx

And yet he returned a sigma 85mm lens on the grounds that it (consistently) front focused.  Curiously, the Canon lenses he reviews seldom if ever need micro adjustment.

The test charts are useful, and the Canon lens reviews are useful, but the reviewer does seem to have a lot of trouble with third party lenses (more than other reviewers). I would not put much weight on tdp's reviews for third party lenses.