# Roger Buys a Camera System: A 24-70mm System Comparison



## Anthony (Feb 7, 2013)

An interesting point of view.
The lens can't do all the job. Canon has to wake up and sell better SLR. The best zoom lesn (Dxomark) underperforms on Canon SLR vs Nikon's.

"But if you want to look at it another way, the Tamron on a D800E is about the resolution equal of a Canon Mk II "on a 5DIII — a bit sharper in the center, not quite as sharp in the corners, but pretty even. The Tamron-Nikon combination (for a guy like me looking at shelling out some major bucks soon) is $1,000 cheaper than the Canon-Canon system."


http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/01/a-24-70mm-system-comparison


----------



## Marsu42 (Feb 7, 2013)

Ugh, so I'm about to get the worst performing combination - 6d (even less sharp than 5d2/5d3) and the Tamron :-o ... but on the bright side that's also cheaper, I'm not going to shoot the Tamron @f2.8 all the time and I'm reading that 



> The real bottom line here is that there are no losers. The resolution numbers all of these combinations show are nothing short of amazing. For example, all three zooms are equal to, or slightly better than, the superb Zeiss 50mm f/2 Makro Planar at equal apertures on the same camera."


----------



## meli (Feb 7, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> Ugh, so I'm about to get the worst performing combination - 6d (even less sharp than 5d2/5d3) and the Tamron :-o ... but on the bright side that's also cheaper, I'm not going to shoot the Tamron @f2.8 all the time and I'm reading that
> 
> 
> 
> > The real bottom line here is that there are no losers. The resolution numbers all of these combinations show are nothing short of amazing. For example, all three zooms are equal to, or slightly better than, the superb Zeiss 50mm f/2 Makro Planar at equal apertures on the same camera."


Actually the tamron lens confuses me abit. I have a mk1 and the nikon and im thinkin' of adding the tamron as an experiment. Although slightly underperforming it has IS. So someone has to balance out that with a nikon/mk2 will have the maximum quality but tamron will offer more keepers, so quality per quantity might be higher.


----------



## brett b (Feb 7, 2013)

We've heard a lot about resolution and dynamic range in this past year. Sure, those are important considerations when choosing a system. But it doesn't take into consideration the ability of the camera hardware. 

In some situations I would love to have the resolution of the D8000. But I wouldn't want to rely on the autofucus of that camera for my main shooting requirements. For me, the D8000 wouldn't be the right tool for 90% of the jobs I shoot. For others, it might be the perfect tool.


----------



## Axilrod (Feb 7, 2013)

brett b said:


> We've heard a lot about resolution and dynamic range in this past year. Sure, those are important considerations when choosing a system. But it doesn't take into consideration the ability of the camera hardware.
> 
> In some situations I would love to have the resolution of the D8000. But I wouldn't want to rely on the autofucus of that camera for my main shooting requirements. For me, the D8000 wouldn't be the right tool for 90% of the jobs I shoot. For others, it might be the perfect tool.



What's a D8000?


----------



## Marsu42 (Feb 7, 2013)

meli said:


> Actually the tamron lens confuses me abit. I have a mk1 and the nikon and im thinkin' of adding the tamron as an experiment. Although slightly underperforming it has IS. So someone has to balance out that with a nikon/mk2 will have the maximum quality but tamron will offer more keepers, so quality per quantity might be higher.



... that's also what I think and have read about the choice, though it really depends on the scene because obviously for motion and fast shooting with more need for the fast Canon af and w/o allowing for the vc to settle the Tamron cannot generate more keepers.


----------



## infared (Feb 7, 2013)

I LOVE any-and-everything that Roger posts on the web. I ALWAYS learn something or lots-of-somethings when I read his posts. He is thorough, honest and just has a great, obsessive POV.
..the only thing I like more ...is watching him try to suffer thru buying a camera system that is going to make him happy!!!! This is just wonderfully great.. I could not do it...I have two complete systems. LOL. Yes I am single with no responsibilities!!!! 
GOOD LUCK ROGER..... 8)


----------



## meli (Feb 7, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> ... that's also what I think and have read about the choice, though it really depends on the scene because obviously for motion and fast shooting with more need for the fast Canon af and w/o allowing for the vc to settle the Tamron cannot generate more keepers.



Depends on the shooting style/requirements. You're right about sports for example, on the other hand consider low light receptions, or low light everything i suppose, IS is a serious advantage IQ wise either allowing you sharper images or lower iso.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 8, 2013)

Having bought a D800 (not E), it is certainly true that the files are much larger, and resolution is much higher. I also bought the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G and a Nikon 200-400.
However, when I looked at the more expensive Nikon 24-120 versus the much less expensive Canon 24-105mmL, and the Nikon 80-400mm versus the older but much better Canon 100-400mmL, and then Nikon has nothing the equal of my 135mmL. I just sold the camera and lenses and kept on with Canon.
Lenses are where the investment is, Camera bodies last 3-4 years before being updated, so I have a much larger investment in Canon lenses.
One additional thing. While my D800 was wonderful at ISO 100 and even 400, it started rapidly gaining noise at ISO 800, and at the very high ISO's 6400 and above, its DR advantage turns into a negative.
The other issue is post processing hundreds or thousands of images when it can take 6-10 times as long for my fairly powerful computer to render a image, or to grind out Noise Reduction.
I'd easily recommend a D800 to someone using it for low ISO landscape images when they only took a few at a time, but not for someone who uses it in very low light and shoots 500 or more images a night at ISO 6400 or above.
Its merely a matter of the best tool for the job.


----------



## Zlatko (Feb 8, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I'd easily recommend a D800 to someone using it for low ISO landscape images when they only took a few at a time, but not for someone who uses it in very low light and shoots 500 or more images a night at ISO 6400 or above.
> Its merely a matter of the best tool for the job.


I agree. For landscape, D800 (or D800E) is the way to go. I typically shoot in low light (weddings), lots and lots of images, high ISO, etc., so Canon works better for me — better skin tone, radio-control built into the flash, and the option of smaller Raw file sizes.


----------



## brett b (Feb 8, 2013)

Axilrod said:


> brett b said:
> 
> 
> > We've heard a lot about resolution and dynamic range in this past year. Sure, those are important considerations when choosing a system. But it doesn't take into consideration the ability of the camera hardware.
> ...



Ooops. One too many zeros. D800. But you knew what I meant.


----------



## iso79 (Feb 8, 2013)

This is why I don't bother with most 3rd party lenses except Zeiss lenses.


----------

