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.ca]

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.

 

[Loswr]

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 ... ? :-\

Try reading the Canon 24-70/2.8L II review and see how many copies he had to test. It's not only 3rd party lenses, but usually 3rd party lenses. The Sigma 35/1.4 is the only one that interests me, but I'm sure Canon will bring their MkII shortly with better IQ and weather sealing.

 

[bholliman]

I was seriously considering buying this lens, debating between it and the Canon 24-70 2.8 II. But, this review along with experience of others with bad copes has made rule out buying the Tamron.

The copy Photozone (http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/741-tamron2470f28eosff) tested was very good and Dustin Abbot
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11251.0 has a very good copy.

However, TDP had to go through 3 lenses before getting a good one. A friend of mine who is a professional wedding photographer purchased one from B&H. He has received and returned 4 lenses and still has not received a decent copy. All had AF issues and the others were sharp on one side and soft on the other. Once lens front focused badly and was not correctable at AFMA +20. Sounds like Tamron has some serious QA issues...

Personally, I don't want to go through the hassle of trying to find a good copy. I could get lucky, but evidence says the odds are against it.

 

[sdsr]

babiesphotos' response is a useful reminder of why it's hard to figure out via the internet what a consensus might be (even though it may be easier there than anywhere else). People like to complain and warn and seem less likely to report a favorable or neutral experience. Similarly, the problem they reported at lensrentals was announced via a special blog entry, but it took a rather obscure response to a specific comment to report that subsequent copies of the lens are just fine and have no new problems. I would add that since the folk at lensrentals see more copies of lenses than just about anyone else, and seem reliable/unbiased/accurate in their reporting, their comments on the mechanical reliability of any particular lens are more valuable than most.

For my part (largely worthless though this information is), I've used two copies, one via lensrentals and one I bought from amazon. Both performed exactly as they should (I ended up returning the one I bought because it had no relevant advantage for me over my 24-105).

 

[Viggo]

Is it a way to check if a lens is decentered with Focal?

 

[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....

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.

That's great...but the reviewer at The Digital Picture just purchased TWO unacceptable lenses and sent the lens in to Tamron for a repair and had the lens returned unrepaired.?...reinforcing the bad experience that Roger had with lens elements falling out. I have been shooting for well over 40 years....I have never heard of that kind of failure for a Lens in that price range. (There may be other incidence of elements falling out, but I am unaware of any).
Each of us can make our own decisions..I have stated mine and backed it with supporting info as to my choice. Everyone is free to make their individual choice, as well. If we take in all the evidence here and read some of the experiences in the post above, purchasing this lens seems very risky to this photographer.
I have to say I purchased a great copy of the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II and am very happy even at the high cost.