October 22, 2014, 01:46:47 AM

Author Topic: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review  (Read 29496 times)

mbworldz

  • Guest
Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #45 on: May 22, 2012, 12:35:24 PM »
I just received mine yesterday and I have to say this lens is freaking amazing.   Weight is about the same as the Canon 24-70 , Solid built.   
To me the quality is pretty much as close as Canon.    Focusing is super quiet.  Before I purchase this I was debating should I get the Canon 24-70 or the new 24-70 II ?  But when I thought about
the VC from the Tamron, you can't beat it.   You spent over $2000 for Canon and still don't have IS.   This VC from the Tamron is bad ass,  it helps a lot in low shutter speed.   You still can get sharp pictures.
For $1299, this is well worth it.  I bought it from B&H.   I also went to WPPI in Vegas back in Feb.  At the Tamron booth, they didn't have the lens for demonstration, but tons of the people were asking about it and
they show the post production quality of that lens.   Since then, I already have that in mind, this probably my alternative.   Since the Canon 24-70 cost too much (without IS).   

Trust me, you won't be disappointed  :-)
« Last Edit: May 22, 2012, 02:57:59 PM by mbworldz »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #45 on: May 22, 2012, 12:35:24 PM »

well_dunno

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 356
    • View Profile
Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #46 on: May 22, 2012, 05:19:45 PM »
I just received mine yesterday and I have to say this lens is freaking amazing.   


Congratulations on your purchase!

Could you share some pictures that contains bokeh highlights? There has been quite some talk on the concentric circle pattern aka onion bokeh which was initially blamed on the rain drops on the front glass...

Cheers!


Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4812
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #47 on: May 22, 2012, 05:37:30 PM »
There has been quite some talk on the concentric circle pattern aka onion bokeh which was initially blamed on the rain drops on the front glass...
It's not due to rain drops, it's how the lens is built and will show up when point light sources are in the background. You'll only recognize it at higher magnification, some other well-received lenses have it, too (Sigma 50/1.4) and it depends on your shooting style if you'll see it at all.

The bokeh is not the problem, if any then the large production variance of Tamron, the slower af and the sharpness falloff even in mid-frame on ff bodies might be. You'll have to weight this against the Tamron having image stabilization and being half the price of the upcoming Canon 24-70ii.

Look here for a conclusive thread about the Tamron including many sample pictures:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1145772&page=33

well_dunno

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 356
    • View Profile
Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #48 on: May 23, 2012, 03:21:50 PM »
There has been quite some talk on the concentric circle pattern aka onion bokeh which was initially blamed on the rain drops on the front glass...
It's not due to rain drops, it's how the lens is built and will show up when point light sources are in the background. You'll only recognize it at higher magnification, some other well-received lenses have it, too (Sigma 50/1.4) and it depends on your shooting style if you'll see it at all.

The bokeh is not the problem, if any then the large production variance of Tamron, the slower af and the sharpness falloff even in mid-frame on ff bodies might be. You'll have to weight this against the Tamron having image stabilization and being half the price of the upcoming Canon 24-70ii.

Look here for a conclusive thread about the Tamron including many sample pictures:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1145772&page=33

Thanks! I did follow some of the talk on the net too. The issue is my main reason for purchasing a f/2.8 lens is its ability to blur the background, thus bokeh is important. I need to disagree on the concentric rings being visible at high magnification -  the initial sample shot at f/2.8 (http://www.ephotozine.com/article/tamron-sp-24-70mm-f-2-8-vc-usd-lens-review-19056) shows a good deal of it without any magnification at all. My request was more out of curiosity though, I am waiting to see what the mighty 24-70 mark II is going to deliver :)

Cheers!

aznable

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 233
    • View Profile
Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #49 on: June 19, 2012, 05:03:08 AM »
Tally up the recent blows to Canon on 3 major projects

1) Nikon D800 is better than the 5D3 in almost all aspects, even video.
2) Very overpriced Canon Cinema division got destroyed at NAB by Black Magic and Sony who stole all the buzz.
3) Now Tamron fills the I.S. niche that #1 feature in the 24-70 that Canon customers were begging and pleading for, but Canon failed to deliver.


so i guess Canon will shut down and exits the camera, lenses and video to focus on printers soon...lol
Canon 1D Mark III - Canon 50D - sigma 24-70 EX DG - sigma 70-200 EX DG HSM OS - Sigma 50 Art

Albi86

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #50 on: June 19, 2012, 07:49:13 AM »
I'd like to update this thread with Photozone's reviews:

FF: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/741-tamron2470f28eosff
APS-C: http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/742-tamron2470f28eosapsc

Apparently this lens just rocks.

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4812
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #51 on: June 19, 2012, 05:13:14 PM »
Apparently this lens just rocks.

"Apparently" is the correct word, because it rocks if a) you don't care about the "onion" bokeh (see photozone review page 2), b) you can live with the sharpness falloff on ff starting in mid-frame with larger apertures, c) your scenes are static or IS won't help much at this focal lengths, d) a little slower af doesn't matter to you, e) you happen to get a lens that is a good copy. Having said that, I might even get one myself for weddings instead of the Canon mk1 - but I am not really sure yet.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2012, 08:44:02 PM by Marsu42 »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #51 on: June 19, 2012, 05:13:14 PM »

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3087
    • View Profile
Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #52 on: June 19, 2012, 08:04:25 PM »
Apparently this lens just rocks.

"Apparently" is the correct word, because it rocks if a) you don't care about the "onion" bokeh (see photozone review page 2), b) you can live with the sharpness falloff on ff starting in mid-frame with larger apertures, c) your scenes are static or IS won't help much at this focal lengths, d) a little slower af doesn't matter to you, e) you happen to get a lens that is a good copy. Having said that, I might even get one myself for weddings instead of the Canon mk1 - but I am not really sure yet.

Ok, some classic FUD that needs debunking.
(a) Is the only real issue here. If you're shooting at f/2.8 or otherwise shooting for scenes where bokeh will need to be considered then you have to be mindful of the potential impact of onion bokeh.
(b) Just about every lens has sharpness falloff towards the edge, including a lot of Canon's "L" glass. If you look at any MTF graph, you'll see this and similarly it will show up in pictures. In this area, Canon's wide angle "L" zooms are atrocious.
(c) If IS is pointless then why does Canon have it on the 24-105, 17-85, etc? For some people that have trouble holding the camera/lens still, IS is a life saver. Lots of people wanted Canon to come out with an IS version of their 24-70, so it is safe to assume that lots of people see benefit in it being there despite it not "slowing the scene down".
(d) nobody has yet come forward with measurements of AF speed, it's all "feeling" based and we're talking differences in 10ths of a second or less. The only people for whom this will be a problem will be the Internet photography experts that shoot from the comfort of their chair at home.
(e) It has yet to be established that there is any significant variation in lens quality from Tamron regarding this lens. Regardless, there is plenty of talk about of people receiving "soft" Canon lenses too. In both instances it is likely a problem solved with AFMA.

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4812
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #53 on: June 19, 2012, 08:43:22 PM »
Ok, some classic FUD that needs debunking.
(a) Is the only real issue here. If you're shooting at f/2.8 or otherwise shooting for scenes where bokeh will need to be considered then you have to be mindful of the potential impact of onion bokeh.
(b) Just about every lens has sharpness falloff towards the edge, including a lot of Canon's "L" glass. If you look at any MTF graph, you'll see this and similarly it will show up in pictures. In this area, Canon's wide angle "L" zooms are atrocious.
(c) If IS is pointless then why does Canon have it on the 24-105, 17-85, etc? For some people that have trouble holding the camera/lens still, IS is a life saver. Lots of people wanted Canon to come out with an IS version of their 24-70, so it is safe to assume that lots of people see benefit in it being there despite it not "slowing the scene down".
(d) nobody has yet come forward with measurements of AF speed, it's all "feeling" based and we're talking differences in 10ths of a second or less. The only people for whom this will be a problem will be the Internet photography experts that shoot from the comfort of their chair at home.
(e) It has yet to be established that there is any significant variation in lens quality from Tamron regarding this lens. Regardless, there is plenty of talk about of people receiving "soft" Canon lenses too. In both instances it is likely a problem solved with AFMA.
No FUD because as I wrote I'll probably buy the Tamron myself for being a lot of "bang for the buck". But I'm sorry to have to correct you...

a) I disagree: the "onion" boekh is *not* an issue because it needs specific conditions to appear, so for many scenes you'll never see it.

b) Just because there are other Canon lenses that show a sharpness falloff, it doesn't mean it can be taken out of consideration - because the alternatives to the Tamron 24-70 are Canon's new 24-70ii or primes, but of course both at a higher price.

c) The 24-105 has IS because it only has f4 max aperture, and the 17-85 and such are consumer lenses that wouldn't sell w/o IS and are dual-used for shooting still scenes, too. For me, the 24-70 *f2.8* is an event/wedding/docu lens, and since you need about 1/100s min shutter speed for shooting people anyway IS is not needed, esp. if it needs a little time to swing in after af'ing like the Tamron.

d) I'm really happy to debate cons and pros of equipment to make up my mind what to buy, but saying I'm an "Internet photography experts that shoot from the comfort of their chair at home" is just bs and only marks you as one yourself. The Tamron is slower to af esp. at lower light, where even a little makes a difference if you use it for wedding/event w/o preflash or af assist - the photozone review says so, see the "nikonguy" side-by-side comparison, and I tried the lens myself next to a Canon mk1. While the difference might not be large, it may make a difference if you shoot hundreds of pictures in an hour with it like during a wedding or event.
 
e) I'm getting my information from Amazon et al customer reviews this thread: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1145772&page=36 .. and where else would I get information from? Buy 20 lenses myself? While Canon is not a shining light in the past, even the Internet cannot be wrong at least in the tendency that 3rd party manufacturers have more qc issues. But then it has still to be established scientifically that smoking is bad for your health...

Albi86

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #54 on: June 20, 2012, 03:52:23 AM »
Guys, we have to consider a lens in comparison to its competitors.

All these 24-70 f/2.8 zooms are not razor sharp in the edge wider than f/5.6. I don't see the Tammy faring remarkably worse here. On the other hand it has an amazing center sharpness.

Canon has the best bokeh, agreed. Sigma has the worst (ridiculously, because many cheaper Sigma lenses have an amazing bokeh). The Tammy is the middle, with onion rings being the only one remarkable issue.

Which is the best overall? I'd say the Nikkor :D
But the Tamron is much much cheaper and it has VC, which is a very nice feature if you think soon enough pixel density is going to increase considerably. So all in all, this lens is IMHO the wisest purchase in this class.


dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3087
    • View Profile
Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #55 on: June 20, 2012, 07:11:16 AM »
Ok, some classic FUD that needs debunking.
(a) Is the only real issue here. If you're shooting at f/2.8 or otherwise shooting for scenes where bokeh will need to be considered then you have to be mindful of the potential impact of onion bokeh.
(b) Just about every lens has sharpness falloff towards the edge, including a lot of Canon's "L" glass. If you look at any MTF graph, you'll see this and similarly it will show up in pictures. In this area, Canon's wide angle "L" zooms are atrocious.
(c) If IS is pointless then why does Canon have it on the 24-105, 17-85, etc? For some people that have trouble holding the camera/lens still, IS is a life saver. Lots of people wanted Canon to come out with an IS version of their 24-70, so it is safe to assume that lots of people see benefit in it being there despite it not "slowing the scene down".
(d) nobody has yet come forward with measurements of AF speed, it's all "feeling" based and we're talking differences in 10ths of a second or less. The only people for whom this will be a problem will be the Internet photography experts that shoot from the comfort of their chair at home.
(e) It has yet to be established that there is any significant variation in lens quality from Tamron regarding this lens. Regardless, there is plenty of talk about of people receiving "soft" Canon lenses too. In both instances it is likely a problem solved with AFMA.
No FUD because as I wrote I'll probably buy the Tamron myself for being a lot of "bang for the buck". But I'm sorry to have to correct you...

a) I disagree: the "onion" boekh is *not* an issue because it needs specific conditions to appear, so for many scenes you'll never see it.

Do you see the onion bokeh in any of the sample pictures posted by Tamron for the lens? No.

Quote
b) Just because there are other Canon lenses that show a sharpness falloff, it doesn't mean it can be taken out of consideration - because the alternatives to the Tamron 24-70 are Canon's new 24-70ii or primes, but of course both at a higher price.

Bob Atkin's review here:
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/tamron_24-70_f28_VC_review.html
Seems to disagree with your assertions about sharpness falloff towards the edges being an issue.

And more to the point he says:
These problems are fairly easy to correct in post exposure processing. Corner sharpness isn't as good as center sharpness, especially wide open, but again that's pretty much the case for all fast zoom lenses in this range.

It looks like Bob Atkins has a good handle on photography and some real experience with various lenses in this category.

Quote
c) The 24-105 has IS because it only has f4 max aperture, and the 17-85 and such are consumer lenses that wouldn't sell w/o IS and are dual-used for shooting still scenes, too. For me, the 24-70 *f2.8* is an event/wedding/docu lens, and since you need about 1/100s min shutter speed for shooting people anyway IS is not needed, esp. if it needs a little time to swing in after af'ing like the Tamron.

On cameras such as the 5D Mark II and those with even more megapixels, the advice is to shoot at 1/2*zoom for sharp results when without IS. So if you've got a 24-70, without IS you would be best advised to shoot at 1/125 or faster in order to get sharp results. What IS does is bring that back a stop or two, allowing you to get sharp results at 1/60 or slower. Of course that doesn't make up for subject movement, but it isn't only the subject that needs to be still, it is the image capture platform as well.

And as Bob Atkins points out:
Is it as good as the new Canon 24-70/2.8L II USM? I don't know since I have not yet had the chance to evaluate the Canon lens. I would not be surprised if the Canon lens was somewhat sharper wide open in the corners, but that's just a guess at this point. However even if it is sharper you have to ask the question whether any additional sharpness would be worth an extra $1000 and whether or not some of any additional sharpness might be lost in hand held situations in low light due to the lack of optical stabilization.

Quote
d) The Tamron is slower to af esp. at lower light, where even a little makes a difference if you use it for wedding/event w/o preflash or af assist - the photozone review says so, see the "nikonguy" side-by-side comparison, and I tried the lens myself next to a Canon mk1. While the dfference might not be large, it may make a difference if you shoot hundreds of pictures in an hour with it like during a wedding or event.

None of the reviews flag it as being a significant issue.
To reinforce that, you yourself don't know if it will or won't be an issue, you're simply speculating.
And yes, I watched the "nikonguy" review ages ago and came to the conclusion that the issue is negligible as it never impacted any of the photographs that they took.

Quote
e) I'm getting my information from Amazon et al customer reviews this thread: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1145772&page=36

Let me quote one back at you...
http://www.thephoblographer.com/2012/06/20/review-tamron-24-70mm-f2-8-sp-vc-canon-ef-mount/#more-24771
Quote: This lens, however, has to have been the best I’ve ever tested

It should not be left unsaid that Tamron will calibrate any lens for free inside its warranty period according to people posting in that thread you linked to above. To me this indicates that even if you do get a lens that isn't right, Tamron will fix it for you for free. What's not to like about that?

If this lens had the name Canon on it and had a different colour scheme, everyone would be singing its praises.

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4812
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #56 on: June 20, 2012, 07:34:04 AM »
Bob Atkin's review here:
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/tamron_24-70_f28_VC_review.html
Seems to disagree with your assertions about sharpness falloff towards the edges being an issue.

Of course "issue" is subject to what you expect from a lens in the first place. The problem I have personally experienced and that imho is the cause for different opinions are the Tamron qc issues, for example the first lens I could try in a shop was clearly a dud, the sharpness even in the center was a catastrophe. But we don't seem to be able to agree on that.

It should not be left unsaid that Tamron will calibrate any lens for free inside its warranty period according to people posting in that thread you linked to above. To me this indicates that even if you do get a lens that isn't right, Tamron will fix it for you for free. What's not to like about that?
I do like that a lot - however I just called my local Tamron service, and turnaround time is no less than 14 days to get my lens + body combination back... but this might be exactly what I'll have to do if I get the Tamron and once I have a second camera body.

Btw: I just asked around what 24-70 to get for weddings, feel free to contribute :-) ... http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=7479.0

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3087
    • View Profile
Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #57 on: June 20, 2012, 08:22:04 AM »
Bob Atkin's review here:
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/tamron_24-70_f28_VC_review.html
Seems to disagree with your assertions about sharpness falloff towards the edges being an issue.

Of course "issue" is subject to what you expect from a lens in the first place. The problem I have personally experienced and that imho is the cause for different opinions are the Tamron qc issues, for example the first lens I could try in a shop was clearly a dud, the sharpness even in the center was a catastrophe. But we don't seem to be able to agree on that.

There are numerous stories about the importance of AFMA.

This website even hosted a story a couple of stories on "soft lenses".:
http://www.canonrumors.com/tech-articles/this-lens-is-soft-and-other-myths/
How to test a lens
http://www.canonrumors.com/tech-articles/how-to-test-a-lens/

So what you mean is that the lens you tested in store did not match up with your camera.

Quote
It should not be left unsaid that Tamron will calibrate any lens for free inside its warranty period according to people posting in that thread you linked to above. To me this indicates that even if you do get a lens that isn't right, Tamron will fix it for you for free. What's not to like about that?
I do like that a lot - however I just called my local Tamron service, and turnaround time is no less than 14 days to get my lens + body combination back... but this might be exactly what I'll have to do if I get the Tamron and once I have a second camera body.

In the mean time, you should read the articles about "lens softness" on this website and also those about using AFMA (auto-focus micro-adjust)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #57 on: June 20, 2012, 08:22:04 AM »

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4812
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #58 on: June 20, 2012, 08:30:28 AM »
There are numerous stories about the importance of AFMA. In the mean time, you should read the articles about "lens softness" on this website and also those about using AFMA (auto-focus micro-adjust)

Thank you so very much for pointing out afma for me - however, I think I have understood the general concept, so no need for patronizing.

What you may not understand: even if a lens needs afma, it's bound to focus *somewhere* like in the afma test strips. So I'm interested how afma can improve a lens that it isn't sharp *anywhere*?

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3087
    • View Profile
Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #59 on: June 20, 2012, 08:44:19 AM »
There are numerous stories about the importance of AFMA. In the mean time, you should read the articles about "lens softness" on this website and also those about using AFMA (auto-focus micro-adjust)

Thank you so very much for pointing out afma for me - however, I think I have understood the general concept, so no need for patronizing.

What you may not understand: even if a lens needs afma, it's bound to focus *somewhere* like in the afma test strips. So I'm interested how afma can improve a lens that it isn't sharp *anywhere*?

Let me get this straight - you went into a store and they let you shoot an AFMA strip with the lens attached to your camera? Why don't you attach some uploads...

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review
« Reply #59 on: June 20, 2012, 08:44:19 AM »