Tamron's new 24-70mm f2.8 VC

[Kenneth67C]

Thanks for the 'test shots', Kenneth67C.

I especially liked your last shot which provided a wider perspective. Surprising how many empty seats there were!

Actually this was the 2nd of the quarter finals, so it was still early about 4+pm. By the evening sessions when Djokovic and Federer came on court, it was packed. Fed has a huge following, though he was knocked out in the semis by Murray. I didn't go on the last two days, tickets were much more expensive and you only get to watch 1 or 2 matches, but the finals was terrific: 3 hours of solid tennis by Djokovic and Murray. It was touch and go with service games broken and match points saved. In the end, of course there can be only one winner...we get this live telecast on TV.

 

[G-man]

was testing if VC works good for this lens. pretty impressive. of course, i shld just up iso for higher shutter speed, but i am testing e VC capabilities anyway
shot taken handheld with f2.8, 1/5s
http://www.flickr.com/photos/44898006@N06/8096231579/
415645_10151272602236800_620385849_o by tkte_85, on Flickr

Nice! Thanks for sharing!

 

[Kenneth67C]

Ok, final shots to demo the flare control (and VC):

Taken during the lucky draw...lol.
5D3+Tamron 24-70@1/6s, f8, iso800, 24mm.

Taken at the start of the Federer v Cilic match.
5D3+Tamron 24-70@1/15s, f8, iso3200, 24mm.

Overall I'm pretty impressed with the lens. I had plenty of keepers, very few missed/blurred shots. The shots were sharp and had good color saturation. In the above pics, in normal circumstances, these would have been blur and deleted: 1/6s 1/15s and still sharp! Taken without tripod, just handheld. With the spotlights shining directly at the lens, these appeared as nice star burst, which adds to the atmosphere of the event. Great lens!

 

[G-man]

Ok, final shots to demo the flare control (and VC):

Taken during the lucky draw...lol.
5D3+Tamron 24-70@1/6s, f8, iso800, 24mm.

Taken at the start of the Federer v Cilic match.
5D3+Tamron 24-70@1/15s, f8, iso3200, 24mm.

Overall I'm pretty impressed with the lens. I had plenty of keepers, very few missed/blurred shots. The shots were sharp and had good color saturation. In the above pics, in normal circumstances, these would have been blur and deleted: 1/6s 1/15s and still sharp! Taken without tripod, just handheld. With the spotlights shining directly at the lens, these appeared as nice star burst, which adds to the atmosphere of the event. Great lens!

Great! Haven't played with the flare control yet. Gotta try it out some day when I have time.

Again thanks for sharing your shots and thoughts on this lens. Not like I need it since I already own it but always good to see other perspectives.

 

[Kevin Ho]

Hi guys, went through the last few pages of this thread and find the results & samples pretty impressive especially since the shutter speeds being used are way below any I would comfortably use handheld.
Also went through half a dozen reviews from googling and find a lot of the reviews pretty in favor of the Tamron.
I am a Canon 5D2 user BTW, so would like to know if any of you guys here had experience comparing real world results from both the Tamron and Canon version of the 24-70?
From what I have already read, the Tamron is pretty good in terms of value for money (the Canon version is very expensive).

 

[G-man]

Hi guys, went through the last few pages of this thread and find the results & samples pretty impressive especially since the shutter speeds being used are way below any I would comfortably use handheld.
Also went through half a dozen reviews from googling and find a lot of the reviews pretty in favor of the Tamron.
I am a Canon 5D2 user BTW, so would like to know if any of you guys here had experience comparing real world results from both the Tamron and Canon version of the 24-70?
From what I have already read, the Tamron is pretty good in terms of value for money (the Canon version is very expensive).

Not sure how it fares with the 5D2 but shouldn't be any different.

If you want perhaps can rent to try out first?

 

[Kenneth67C]

Hi guys, went through the last few pages of this thread and find the results & samples pretty impressive especially since the shutter speeds being used are way below any I would comfortably use handheld.
Also went through half a dozen reviews from googling and find a lot of the reviews pretty in favor of the Tamron.
I am a Canon 5D2 user BTW, so would like to know if any of you guys here had experience comparing real world results from both the Tamron and Canon version of the 24-70?
From what I have already read, the Tamron is pretty good in terms of value for money (the Canon version is very expensive).

Kelvin, those pics I posted are real world sample pics of a live event, there is no "retake" available. Furthermore, the pics are straight from the cam taken as JPGs, not even RAW, no sharpening, only some pics had adjustment of WB. I think those of us who bought this, did not want to spend as much on Canon II, so we don't have comparisons. You can find that on the web though at some review sites.

The important thing to me is whether you can get the shot that you are satisfied with this lens and I think it delivers.
When it gets darker, the focusing is slower though, that is one thing you have to deal with, though it would also be slower for the Canon, though perhaps the Canon would be faster. Once you have a focus lock, VC though compensates for that.

 

[Kenneth67C]

For the $64,000 question, which of the two cameras do you prefer while using the Tamron 24-70?... which in your opinion produce better IQ?

For the $1,000,000 question, which of the two cameras do you prefer over-all?... the 5D3 or 1D4?

Fine Print: the references to monetary figures are for allegorical and entertainment purposes only.

The 1D4 and 5D3 are different, and that's why I got both. The 1D4 is a speed king, for when I want to get the shot and not miss anything.
IQ its pretty close, though IMO the 5D3 has slightly better colors. For crop magnification, 1D4 has the edge.

Which do I prefer? lol...depends on what I'm shooting. I think you should know already from the description above, they suit different purposes.

 

[Kenneth67C]

I try to be more specific.

1) Are there any barrel distortion at 24-35 mm ?
2) Is the AF able to keep up with the continuous tracking in 1D4 or 1DX?
3) The magnification is 0.2x. How good is the resolution of the lens to crop to 100% and image is still usable?
4) How is the flare control when spotlight enter the lens at an angle?
5) Is there any CA wide open at 24-35mm?
6) Is the 70mm at f2.8 sharp or need to stop down?
7) Is it a parfocal lens?

TIA

1. Yes, at 24 it is quite obvious, so if you are shooting architechture, not very recommended at 24. Below that it is fine.
2. Yes. No experience with the 1Dx though.
3. Pic posted - check it out.
4. ditto
5. Very good CA control at both 24 and 35. One review rated it better than the mk2.
6. Yes sharp at 70 f2.8.
7. No.

 

[raydio]

The 1D4 and 5D3 are different, and that's why I got both. The 1D4 is a speed king, for when I want to get the shot and not miss anything.
IQ its pretty close, though IMO the 5D3 has slightly better colors. For crop magnification, 1D4 has the edge.

Which do I prefer? lol...depends on what I'm shooting. I think you should know already from the description above, they suit different purposes.

Well said. Thanks for the response. Happy shooting!

 

[Kevin Ho]

Kelvin, those pics I posted are real world sample pics of a live event, there is no "retake" available. Furthermore, the pics are straight from the cam taken as JPGs, not even RAW, no sharpening, only some pics had adjustment of WB. I think those of us who bought this, did not want to spend as much on Canon II, so we don't have comparisons. You can find that on the web though at some review sites.

The important thing to me is whether you can get the shot that you are satisfied with this lens and I think it delivers.
When it gets darker, the focusing is slower though, that is one thing you have to deal with, though it would also be slower for the Canon, though perhaps the Canon would be faster. Once you have a focus lock, VC though compensates for that.

Thanks Kenneth...it's always been about getting the shot...

I've been a long time Tamron user, with the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 as my walk-around lens and workhorse lens for many years.
So the Canon II and the Tamron 24-70 VC comes into the picture when considering to upgrade.
Will be using the lens heavily for weddings, landscapes (travel) & portraits.
Anyone using it for similar purposes? How is the AF speed and accuracy?

 

[Kenneth67C]

Thanks Kenneth...it's always been about getting the shot...

I've been a long time Tamron user, with the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 as my walk-around lens and workhorse lens for many years.
So the Canon II and the Tamron 24-70 VC comes into the picture when considering to upgrade.
Will be using the lens heavily for weddings, landscapes (travel) & portraits.
Anyone using it for similar purposes? How is the AF speed and accuracy?

No problem as long as there is sufficient light. All those types of subjects won't pose a problem.
If the light level is lower, it may take longer to acquire focus.

 

[Kevin Ho]

No problem as long as there is sufficient light. All those types of subjects won't pose a problem.
If the light level is lower, it may take longer to acquire focus.

The Tamron 28-75 I mentioned does pretty well in low light when focusing, so I am hoping to get similar level (or better) AF & accuracy.
My Canon 50mm f/1.4 on the other hand, is what I call a lousy lens for low light, always focus hunting even when paired with the AF assist beam from the 580 EX2.
I am hoping the Tamron 24-70 doesn't do something like that or else I am gonna throw it back to the shop...>.<

 

[Kevin Ho]

Anyway, a side question...do you find the colors slightly on the warmer / yellowish side?
I have noticed this on my other Tamron's (28-75mm, 90mm macro & 18-270mm).

 

[Kenneth67C]

Anyway, a side question...do you find the colors slightly on the warmer / yellowish side?
I have noticed this on my other Tamron's (28-75mm, 90mm macro & 18-270mm).

Not particularly warmer. If you compare with Sigma lenses, those are much warmer. In any case, you can easily tweat this when you open the raw file with ACR and just adjust the color temp, OR use the dotter with the curves/saturation later.

 

[GeneKoh]

Not particularly warmer. If you compare with Sigma lenses, those are much warmer. In any case, you can easily tweat this when you open the raw file with ACR and just adjust the color temp, OR use the dotter with the curves/saturation later.

I actually find Tamron's colour rendition more vibrant than Canon's lenses.. I find my reds having more contrast and pleasing to the eye... After using my Tammy 28-300VC and 28-75 lenses, my Canon IS kit lens and my old 28-135 seem "flat", kind of like Canon put the CineStyle flat picture style into the lenses and I'm always having to adjust colour levels back up in Photoshop for pictures taken using my Canon lenses... Always been the case since my 400D and 40D days...

Sigma.. Well.. There's a reason why it's called "Sigma Jaundice", which explains the yellow tint...

 

[Kevin Ho]

Not particularly warmer. If you compare with Sigma lenses, those are much warmer. In any case, you can easily tweat this when you open the raw file with ACR and just adjust the color temp, OR use the dotter with the curves/saturation later.

Don't have any Sigma lenses to compare with currently...haha...but thanks for the feedback, I know tweaking the "warm" tones is easy, just wanted to know if it needs "a lot" or just "a little" xP

Got a quote from a Malaysian seller for RM3550. How much did u guys get your copies?

 

[Kevin Ho]

I actually find Tamron's colour rendition more vibrant than Canon's lenses.. I find my reds having more contrast and pleasing to the eye... After using my Tammy 28-300VC and 28-75 lenses, my Canon IS kit lens and my old 28-135 seem "flat", kind of like Canon put the CineStyle flat picture style into the lenses and I'm always having to adjust colour levels back up in Photoshop for pictures taken using my Canon lenses... Always been the case since my 400D and 40D days...

Sigma.. Well.. There's a reason why it's called "Sigma Jaundice", which explains the yellow tint...

I believe the lenses you compared to are the lesser Canon lenses...if you compare it with the higher end ones is a different story and most come out pretty natural n nicely saturated straight out of cam (35mm f/1.4L? 85mm f/1.2L? 24-70 f/2.8L?).
But of course, those lenses cost a hand n a leg...>.<

 

[Kenneth67C]

I actually find Tamron's colour rendition more vibrant than Canon's lenses.. I find my reds having more contrast and pleasing to the eye... After using my Tammy 28-300VC and 28-75 lenses, my Canon IS kit lens and my old 28-135 seem "flat", kind of like Canon put the CineStyle flat picture style into the lenses and I'm always having to adjust colour levels back up in Photoshop for pictures taken using my Canon lenses... Always been the case since my 400D and 40D days...

Sigma.. Well.. There's a reason why it's called "Sigma Jaundice", which explains the yellow tint...

I have never used kit lenses, except for the 24-105L because I've always known that I would want more than just the kit.
I guess you like your photos sugar coated, that's fine.

When I first started using the 5D2, I noticed a whole new dimension of color fidelity with the Canon's own lenses. If I needed more saturation, that can be easily adjusted.
If you started with the chocolate coated version, it is normally more difficult to get back to the original taste because it is usually slight tweaks to get back the neutrality, but you need to know which to tweak.

 

[Kenneth67C]

Don't have any Sigma lenses to compare with currently...haha...but thanks for the feedback, I know tweaking the "warm" tones is easy, just wanted to know if it needs "a lot" or just "a little" xP

Got a quote from a Malaysian seller for RM3550. How much did u guys get your copies?

Just a little.
CNY7k delivered to my home.