Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Available for Preorder

[birtembuk]

These MFT's promise better sharpness and contrast than the 24-70 mkI. With VC, and If the QC is on par with these charts, it's a no-brainer ... Well, I think I'll wait for some users' reviews.

 

[cayenne]

I wonder if Tamron have a wide-angle lens for full frame up their sleeves somewhere?

Their 70-300 VC faces off quite favourably with Canon's 70-300 IS USM, the 24-70/2.8 VC holds its own against Canon's 24-70/2.8 MkI (very similar price point.) All that is missing is something to compete with the 16-35 or 17-40.

Please forgive a noob...I'm getting close to pulling the trigger on my first Canon, and doing research ,reading forums here...etc.

What does "VC" stand for? I'm not familiar yet with that acronym.....

Thank you!! ;D

cayenne

 

[smirkypants]

What does "VC" stand for? I'm not familiar yet with that acronym.....

Voice-control

(no, just kidding... vibration control = IS = image stabilization)

 

[Stephen Melvin]

I wonder if Tamron have a wide-angle lens for full frame up their sleeves somewhere?

Their 70-300 VC faces off quite favourably with Canon's 70-300 IS USM, the 24-70/2.8 VC holds its own against Canon's 24-70/2.8 MkI (very similar price point.) All that is missing is something to compete with the 16-35 or 17-40.

Please forgive a noob...I'm getting close to pulling the trigger on my first Canon, and doing research ,reading forums here...etc.

What does "VC" stand for? I'm not familiar yet with that acronym.....

Thank you!! ;D

cayenne

"Vibration Control." It's their variation on Canon's image stabilization.

 

[AvTvM]

Looking at the pictures, it appears that, yet again, Tamron didn't bother to make the focus and zoom rings turn the correct direction. Do they not realize that the primary customer for this lens is going to be a professional who owns lenses such as the 70-200L and 17-40L?

This is a serious usability flaw, and a dealbreaker for me. A consistent user interface is critical, and Tamron has broken it here. They finally graduated to the late 20th century and added USM and IS to their lenses; would it kill them to make Canon-mount lenses that behave like Canon's own lenses?

+1
Really incredible to not offer "really right" lenses! Goes for Tamron as well as for Sigma and Tokina.

 

[DJL329]

I wonder if Tamron have a wide-angle lens for full frame up their sleeves somewhere?

Their 70-300 VC faces off quite favourably with Canon's 70-300 IS USM, the 24-70/2.8 VC holds its own against Canon's 24-70/2.8 MkI (very similar price point.) All that is missing is something to compete with the 16-35 or 17-40.

I was thinking the same thing the other day. They had a 17-35mm f/2.8-4.0 FF lens, but stopped making it about a half-dozen years ago.

 

[dadgummit]

I wonder if Tamron have a wide-angle lens for full frame up their sleeves somewhere?

Their 70-300 VC faces off quite favourably with Canon's 70-300 IS USM, the 24-70/2.8 VC holds its own against Canon's 24-70/2.8 MkI (very similar price point.) All that is missing is something to compete with the 16-35 or 17-40.

I had Tamron's 70-300 and it was indeed very sharp. The issue I had was if I had 5-10 seconds to compose and focus on a still subject it did a great job almost every time. If I had to turn 90 degrees and try to focus on something quickly (oh look your daughter is about to dump spaghetti on her head) the lens' focus motor would move quickly but there would be a 25-30% chance of the shot actually being in focus. The canon 70-300L nails it every time (though 3-4X the price) Tamron's 60mm macro is an epic fail for canon's 7D, they admitted the problem like a year ago and I have not heard since whether or not they fixed it. For me it would have to have been almost as sharp as the mark II at $1300 for me to even bother taking a risk, I hate paying for return shipping on a crap 3rd party lens.

 

[dadgummit]

On Adorama's website, it says that this lens comes with a 6 year warranty.

Is this a mistake?

Because Canon's warranty, for all EF lenses in the USA, is 1 year.

Taqmron's warrantys are very long, that is probably correct.

 

[dadgummit]

I wonder if Tamron have a wide-angle lens for full frame up their sleeves somewhere?

Their 70-300 VC faces off quite favourably with Canon's 70-300 IS USM, the 24-70/2.8 VC holds its own against Canon's 24-70/2.8 MkI (very similar price point.) All that is missing is something to compete with the 16-35 or 17-40.

I was thinking the same thing the other day. They had a 17-35mm f/2.8-4.0 FF lens, but stopped making it about a half-dozen years ago.

I wish Sigma would make one personally.

I had the Sig 10-20 f4-5.6 on my 7d and LOVED it!! I only sold it when I purchased the 5d3. In my opinion the sig 10-20 is sharper with less distortion on a 7d than a 16-35L II on a full frame.

 

[dadgummit]

biggest problem I have is reviews put the camera on a tripod and shoot pieces of paper in a controlled environment. In that case the 70-300 VC would perform very well. But out in the field it was missing focus left and right. I don't care how good the IQ is if my intended subject is not in focus. The 70-300L nails it almost every time, I love my copy!!

 

[gene_can_sing]

I had the Tamron 17-50 f2.6 VC APS-C and it had decent image quality, but the mechanics SUCKED big time. The focus throw was only a meager 45 degrees and very loose which made manual focus not very good for video.

The Canon 17-55 f2.8 is much better, but costs 2x as much.

If Tamron made it with decent mechanics and a good picture quality, I would be it because of the V.C. which is great for video.

 

[Maculosa]

Hello,

This is my first post but i often read on this forum.

Here i found i link on another forum that show some sample pictures of the new Tamron 24-70 VC.
Unfortunatly there is no pictures taken at F2.8.

http://blog.naver.com/sp_marketing/70135411814

 

[eirikv]

This looks like an good alternative to Canons 24-105 4L that I have been thinking about for more than a year.
I have the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, my only problem with that lenses is it's 28mm wide angle. I have no other excuses than that to replace it. It delivers IQ at the same level as my Canon L lenses and Canon primes.

I might be the one of the "crazy people" to order this before seeing any reviews.

My only problem with it is the 82mm filter diameter. I would like it to be 77mm.

 

[carlc]

I wonder what body Tamron used? I am impressed with the shots.

 

[cliffwang]

I am highly interested in this lens. Hopefully we will see more samples soon. If the IQ is same or better than Canon 24-70mm mark I, I will buy it.

 

[carlc]

I can't wait to see a side by side comparison of the new Tamron 24-70 to the new Canon version, hopefully on a Canon 7D and a 5D3. Need to finalize my 2012 purchase list. Just hope the Canon version doesn't slip past July and Canon resolves the production and Firmware issues on the 5D3. The wait is killing me!!!

 

[dswatson83]

It is almost unfair to be comparing this lens to the Canon lenses because Canon doesn't even make one. I'm sure if Canon did, it would be better, but seriously if this performs even close to the 1st version 24-70 Canon, it will be a winner. Tamron has an exclusive on its hands right now...I hope they don't screw it up. I have never wanted a lens to be awesome so much in my entire life. With this Tamron joining my Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, these 2 lenses would be all I ever carry. With VC it opens up many abilities with dusk/dawn landscapes, interior shots, and video where every other lens fails. And with an aperture of 2.8 it will be great in low light or for getting some nice bokeh

 

[SpareImp]

This site shows a sample photo at f/2.8. It’s a part of the slideshow, so you’ll have to wait for it. It also shows the benefit of the rounded diaphragm compared to a hexagonal diaphragm:
http://www.tamron.com.au/di24-70_a007.html
Already posted this in the other thread about this lens.

 

[cliffwang]

It is almost unfair to be comparing this lens to the Canon lenses because Canon doesn't even make one. I'm sure if Canon did, it would be better, but seriously if this performs even close to the 1st version 24-70 Canon, it will be a winner. Tamron has an exclusive on its hands right now...I hope they don't screw it up. I have never wanted a lens to be awesome so much in my entire life. With this Tamron joining my Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, these 2 lenses would be all I ever carry. With VC it opens up many abilities with dusk/dawn landscapes, interior shots, and video where every other lens fails. And with an aperture of 2.8 it will be great in low light or for getting some nice bokeh

I don't get it. If Tamron 24-70mm and Canon 24-70mm mark I are about same price, that is a fair comparison. If Tamron has better IQ and VC, why should I buy Canon 24-70mm? Ask yourself how much you would like to pay for IS feature. I have Canon 70-200mm II IS. This lens is about 1000+ more than non-IS version. I can tell you, I would like to pay at 300+ if Canon has 24-70mm IS version. Don't forget Tamron has 6 year warranty and Canon has only 1 year warranty.

 

[birdman]

It is almost unfair to be comparing this lens to the Canon lenses because Canon doesn't even make one. I'm sure if Canon did, it would be better, but seriously if this performs even close to the 1st version 24-70 Canon, it will be a winner. Tamron has an exclusive on its hands right now...I hope they don't screw it up. I have never wanted a lens to be awesome so much in my entire life. With this Tamron joining my Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, these 2 lenses would be all I ever carry. With VC it opens up many abilities with dusk/dawn landscapes, interior shots, and video where every other lens fails. And with an aperture of 2.8 it will be great in low light or for getting some nice bokeh

You would pay for Canon 24-70 Mk I because of much better resale value, much better build quality, and much better quality control. I've owned SEVERAL 3rd party lenses: Tokina 12-24, Tokina 28-70/2.6-2.8; Tamron 17-50 (non VC), and Tamron 28-75. The Tamrons performed good, actually the 17-50 was super! But they are built so cheap. For instance the focus rings will wear out and the glue will loosen, the lens barrels will start to creep out, etc. Go for Canon or even Sigma.

I don't get it. If Tamron 24-70mm and Canon 24-70mm mark I are about same price, that is a fair comparison. If Tamron has better IQ and VC, why should I buy Canon 24-70mm? Ask yourself how much you would like to pay for IS feature. I have Canon 70-200mm II IS. This lens is about 1000+ more than non-IS version. I can tell you, I would like to pay at 300+ if Canon has 24-70mm IS version. Don't forget Tamron has 6 year warranty and Canon has only 1 year warranty.