24-70mm f2.8 - Tamron on my Camera, Canon in the closet

[bobkeenan]

The details of my title can be found in my blog at:

Bobkeenan Photography Canon versus Tamron VC 24-70mm f2.8 lenses - Bobkeenan Photography

But the essence is that I love my Canon 24-70mm f2.8 but for the kind of shots that I do I need the IS. I had it with the 17-55 when I had an APS camera.

When Tamron came out with the VC version I jumped on it. Even though I know Canon has great glass and I knew very little about Tamron.

So..... I am happy I made the switch. Many of the finding in my blog match other reviews and finding. I used Reikan's Focal to verify some sharpness info. The Tamron is sharper at 70mm, the Canon better at 24mm. There is some vignetting at 24mm on the Tamron. I have not seen the onion bokeh. I think the bokeh is nice.

Bottom line its a good lens and that VC makes my day!!

[stef@apl]

Very cool, I was wondering how that lens performed. The MTF charts didn't look great (with some bizarre squiggliness, which led me to suspect there would be nasty cat-eye or onion-like bokeh at the edges). The center and mid-range bokeh should kick butt, and it looks like it does.

I would suggest you do a simple test and check the bokeh near the edges using many point light sources, lines, and other symmetrical repeating patterns (like marbles fading off into the distance, especially with a flash). This type of bokeh is common when making shots of people in front of trees or city lights behind... I'd be very interested in seeing it from one corner to the center of the top edge.

[bobkeenan]

You are right, I did not check that kind of bokeh. I guess I don't take many shots where I would have that situation.... but I will look for that kind of shot and post my results.

[swampler]

Nice review. One comment...you talk about the 17-55 f/2.8 lens, but a picture of the cheap 18-55 lens and call it an 18-55 f/2.8 under the image. Might want to fix that.

[Max@Home]

Originally Posted by swampler

Nice review. One comment...you talk about the 17-55 f/2.8 lens, but a picture of the cheap 18-55 lens and call it an 18-55 f/2.8 under the image. Might want to fix that.

...and the image of the Canon 24-70L is an image of the 24-70F2.8 L II, not the one your reviewed... (as it is not out yet, alas...)

...further in the review you show the current 24-70L in a comparative image next to the Tammy, but you assume that the 24-70L 'compressed to 24mm' is at it's shortest size: wrong: the 24-70L extends to 24mm, and is 70mm when fully retracted. ( )

This is the reason why the hood (that is put on the 'fixed' part of the lens and does not retract or extend, the barrel retracts and extends within the hood) is the best hood for a zoom lens ever: long and deep when the lens is retracted to 70mm position, and undeep and wide when it needs to be (at the extended 24mm position).

This is why it protects better against lens flare than any other zoom-lens-hood: zoom-lens-hoods that retract and extend 'with the barrel' are always optimized for the lenses widest position - only...

...but I am happy the VC makes you happy

...€0.02...

Kindest regards,

Max@Home

[bobkeenan]

Originally Posted by swampler

Nice review. One comment...you talk about the 17-55 f/2.8 lens, but a picture of the cheap 18-55 lens and call it an 18-55 f/2.8 under the image. Might want to fix that.

Oops.... thanks.

[bobkeenan]

Originally Posted by Max@Home

...and the image of the Canon 24-70L is an image of the 24-70F2.8 L II, not the one your reviewed... (as it is not out yet, alas...)

...further in the review you show the current 24-70L in a comparative image next to the Tammy, but you assume that the 24-70L 'compressed to 24mm' is at it's shortest size: wrong: the 24-70L extends to 24mm, and is 70mm when fully retracted. ( )

This is the reason why the hood (that is put on the 'fixed' part of the lens and does not retract or extend, the barrel retracts and extends within the hood) is the best hood for a zoom lens ever: long and deep when the lens is retracted to 70mm position, and undeep and wide when it needs to be (at the extended 24mm position).

This is why it protects better against lens flare than any other zoom-lens-hood: zoom-lens-hoods that retract and extend 'with the barrel' are always optimized for the lenses widest position - only...

...but I am happy the VC makes you happy

...€0.02...

Kindest regards,

Max@Home

I guess I made several mistakes. Thanks. And I never noticed that the Canon extends for wide angle. I have used that almost every day for the past couple years and just never thought about it. The Tamron DOES extend for the 70mm which I think is the intuitive . And.... this all explains, like you said, why the Canon hood is SOOOOO much larger than the Tamron. Thanks again.

[Max@Home]

Originally Posted by bobkeenan

I guess I made several mistakes. Thanks. And I never noticed that the Canon extends for wide angle. I have used that almost every day for the past couple years and just never thought about it. The Tamron DOES extend for the 70mm which I think is the intuitive . And.... this all explains, like you said, why the Canon hood is SOOOOO much larger than the Tamron. Thanks again.

nice corrections

...€0.02...

Kindest regards,

Max@Home

[swampler]

Originally Posted by Max@Home

nice corrections

[stef@apl]

I saw that too, max

overall I'd really like to see the bokeh review across the top of the frame.