Tamron lens for canon 6d

joel222

joel222

Suspended / Banned
Messages
703
Name
Lee
Edit My Images
No
I've been looking at buying a canon 70-200 f2.8 is, and a 24-70 f2.8 ii, and with them being a bit pricey I thought I'd maybe go down the Tamron route. I'd like to here from someone that has owned the Tamron equivalents and the canon lenses too, just to see how they compared. Also with the Tamron 70-200, there are a couple of variations and I'd like to know how they differ. The TAMRON SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD A009, and Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 Di LD IF macro lens. I know one's macro but would that still be ok for weddings/christenings etc?

 
Of the 70-200 tamron's the new one with vc is the one to get the older model is sharp but the af slow.
 
I got a Canon 24-70 2.8 II last week and my simple message would be - keep saving! You'll only regret not waiting, I am just in awe of the quality of it. Beautiful, beautiful lens. I lusted after it for months so I know the feeling you have of just wanting to upgrade but it's worth it.
 
Canon600D said:
I got a Canon 24-70 2.8 II last week and my simple message would be - keep saving! You'll only regret not waiting, I am just in awe of the quality of it. Beautiful, beautiful lens. I lusted after it for months so I know the feeling you have of just wanting to upgrade but it's worth it.
Click to expand...

plus one.

I own the 24-70 2.8 II and its a cracking lens. If you're serious about your photography you will only end up spending more to upgrade later on. Re sale value on the Canon lens is likely to remain high aswell so you won't. Lose too much if you ever decide to sell it
 
I've the 24-105 also and the only advantage I can see is the reach. The sharpness of the 24-70 is just so perfect, the clarity, the vibrance of colour... the 24-105 is a great all round lens but for those wow shots with huge detail - 24-70. It's quite a bit cheaper if you go the grey import route but that's your own decision.
 
joel222 said:
Thanks for the replies, how much better is the canon 24-70 than the 24-105 then, and are we talking mark 1 or 2?
Click to expand...

The lower end if the zoom range is better spaced on the 24-70 f2.8 II compared to the 24-105. The whole extra stop of light is a big deal mostly compensating for the lack of image stabilisation and the overall image quality is just that much better than (the already good 24-105) 70 on a ff does sometimes feel a slight bit short having been used to 55mm on my crop sensor at the long end but it dove tails nicely with your choice of the 70-200mm lens on offer. Ultimately any lens us a trade off but the 24-70 f2.8 II is very widely lauded
 
I'm not a 24-70 owner just yet but I'm saving up for one and after doing a LOT of research I decided to go for the Tamron 24-70 as it has VC and it is the second best from all 24-70 with the first place going to the canon 24-70 F/2.8 II. I have tested these lenses and others too and the results were the canon just has the edge over the Tamron on the corner to corner sharpness. If I could justify the extra cost for the canon I would but I don't do this for a living so I would happily settle for the tamron.
 
I was in a similar position to you, and also own a 6D. I had a Canon 70-200mm L f4 IS and was debating on upgrading to the f2.8 MKII. The Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 VC USD was suggested and I managed to get my hands on one to trial. I was disappointed with the Tamron, I did some comparison shots with my f4 and the colours were much richer and overall the images just looked better with the Canon. There is also a noticeable difference in reach at the long end, I'd read reviews that the Tamron was really 186mm not 200mm and again that was evident. I decided against the Tamron and have now gone for the f2.8 MKII Canon and am delighted I did. The Tamron is a good lens, but for me both the Canons beat it, especially at the full zoom.
 
I have the canon 24-105L and I am thinking of selling to purchase the Tamron 24-70 VC. They seems to get pretty good reviews :)
 
I've got the tamron 70-200 f2.8 VC and have been more than happy with its performance on my 60d. So much so that I've ordered the 24-70 VC to go on my 5Diii and although the canon 24-70 ii is sharper at the extremes I doubt it will make much difference for me, in fact the VC on the Tamron is worth more to me. In short are the canons sharper and faster, maybe marginally but not so it would make much difference. If you consider that by buying the Tamrons you save circa £1800 (enough to buy a grey 5D3), then I know where my money goes. I wouldn't say the canons were that much better
 
Last edited:
I've been really pleased with the lens. It feels a lump to hold, there's no doubting the build. It's nice and sharp with fast AF. The only negative is the heavy vignetting at f/2.8 at 24mm but 1 click in LR and it's all gone. The files are the RAWs so will only open on a computer I'll upload some JPEGs later
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top