# Canon 24 70 2.8 L version I or Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC



## sama (Jul 26, 2013)

Dear friends, 

I have just ordered a 6D body (refurbished) and have around $1K left to buy a lens for it. I am seriously consider to buy a 24-70 range F2.8 zoom lens and cannot decide on which one of the above is better in term of IQ and value. A 3 yrs' old used Canon L is asking on the Craigslist for 1K to 1.2K and I will be able to buy a grey market Tamron for around $900.

Which one should I choose ? Please help.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 26, 2013)

I vote Tamron. Reviews state that it compares well versus 24-70 f/2.8 version 1, plus you get IS and a warranty.


----------



## brad-man (Jul 26, 2013)

As i have never shot with the Canon lens, I can't offer a real comparison. I will recommend the Tamron anyway because I have one and it is the ideal single lens solution for me. I have quite a few lenses, and the Tamron equals or bests all of them, except for my 100L and my Sigma 35. It is the equivalent of my 70-200 2.8L ll in the standard zoom range. As Random Orbits mentioned, having OS (IS) is "priceless." I'm sure you'd be happy with either one, but the Tamron really is a fantastic lens which, obviously, I highly recommend.


----------



## cliffwang (Jul 26, 2013)

brad-man said:


> As i have never shot with the Canon lens, I can't offer a real comparison. I will recommend the Tamron anyway because I have one and it is the ideal single lens solution for me. I have quite a few lenses, and the Tamron equals or bests all of them, except for my 100L and my Sigma 35. It is the equivalent of my 70-200 2.8L ll in the standard zoom range. As Random Orbits mentioned, having OS (IS) is "priceless." I'm sure you'd be happy with either one, but the Tamron really is a fantastic lens which, obviously, I highly recommend.


+1
I switched to Tamron from Canon 24-70 2.8L MK1. I cannot be happier with this lens. The VC lets me enjoy taking photos more because you can have at least two stops benefits from it. The lens will let you take more useful photos indoor, dawn, and twilight.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Jul 26, 2013)

I'm selling my 24-70 2.8 L MkI; I was never fully satisfied with its bulk and the results I got from this lens. When I bought a 24-105L for travel purposes I found the 24-105 to be much sharper and the results generally more pleasing. So after some consideration I've decided to get a 35mm f/1.4 instead of the 24-70.

As for the Tamron, I can't verify the image quality but I once handled one on a 5D3 body and took a few shots in the camera store; it's got a nice balance, akin to the 24-105. This is something I find important because the Canon 24-70 MkI is decidedly front heavy and not really that nice to carry around all day.


----------



## silvestography (Jul 27, 2013)

+1 for the tamron. Center sharpness rivals the 24-70 II and corners are about equal to the v1. Plus you get VC and a lighter package. Only downside is that 82mm filter thread.


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Jul 29, 2013)

I vote Tamron as well. It's simply the best value.

However, I have heard that the rubber focus ring has been coming off for some people, as if the glue they used wasn't up to snuff. Dave Dugdale (learningdslrvideo.com) had this happen to him and recently posted a video about it. Note sure how Tamron people are handling this w/ the warranty and all. I know the grips were coming off my 60D and Canon service fixed it no problem, but not sure how that compares to Tamron service.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 29, 2013)

Don't bother with version I, get the Tamron 24-70 VC.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Jul 29, 2013)

Buy the Tameon 24-70 f/2.8 VC ... pretty much every single review I have read puts the Tamron 24-70 VC ahead of EF 24-70 MK1.


----------



## sama (Jul 29, 2013)

sama said:


> Which one should I choose ? Please help.



Thanks for everybody's opinion here. I have my decision now. I will go for the Tamron.


----------



## michi (Jul 29, 2013)

I have the 24-70 2.8 MKI. I bought it refurbished from Canon for about $1,000. I sent it back to them because of a small issue and had them adjust it while they had it. It's tack sharp now. I really like it for taking pictures of my kids. However, the thing is a heavy monster. I would never take that on a trip with me. If I had the choice now, I would probably buy the Tamron. I still wonder if I should just sell it and get the Tamron, but I think I have a really good copy of the Mark I so I'm hesitant. The image stabilization is very tempting though, I try to do as much shooting without flash as I can and that would really help me out. I would say you made the right choice.


----------



## brad-man (Jul 29, 2013)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> I vote Tamron as well. It's simply the best value.
> 
> However, I have heard that the rubber focus ring has been coming off for some people, as if the glue they used wasn't up to snuff. Dave Dugdale (learningdslrvideo.com) had this happen to him and recently posted a video about it. Note sure how Tamron people are handling this w/ the warranty and all. I know the grips were coming off my 60D and Canon service fixed it no problem, but not sure how that compares to Tamron service.



The Tamron has a SIX year warranty, so I wouldn't sweat it


----------



## Krob78 (Jul 29, 2013)

sama said:


> sama said:
> 
> 
> > Which one should I choose ? Please help.
> ...


I think you made a great choice Sama! Let us know how you like it and what your overall assessment of it is, once you get out there and get shooting with it. 

All the best!


----------



## mdmphoto (Jul 29, 2013)

I've used my buddy's Canon 24-70 regularly and was pretty pleased with it. I rented the Tamron for a month shortly after its introduction; awesome lens exceeds the Canon I in sharpness and the VR seals the deal for me. It is on my very short list of things to buy next. Would have already bought it except I bought a 6D kit instead. You will not regret buying the Tamron...


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Jul 30, 2013)

Hey Canon - are you seeing how EVERYONE on this CANON forum are recommending a 3rd party lens? Maybe it's time to change something.


----------



## OmarSV11 (Jul 30, 2013)

DXOMark list of the best glass for the 6D shows both Tamron zooms as the best for the camera... 

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Best-lenses-for-your-Canon-EOS-6D/Best-primes-and-zoom-for-the-Canon-EOS-6D

Personally I'll wait for Sigma to renew their 24-70 (f2 weee!) and dont know if it will happen, but, I hope they relaunch the 70-200 with the new Art/Sport construction soon.


----------



## cliffwang (Jul 30, 2013)

OmarSV11 said:


> DXOMark list of the best glass for the 6D shows both Tamron zooms as the best for the camera...
> 
> http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Best-lenses-for-your-Canon-EOS-6D/Best-primes-and-zoom-for-the-Canon-EOS-6D
> 
> Personally I'll wait for Sigma to renew their 24-70 (f2 weee!) and dont know if it will happen, but, I hope they relaunch the 70-200 with the new Art/Sport construction soon.


If I didn't get my Tamron 24-70mm, I might wait for Sigam 24-70 f2. Recently Sigma is making really great lenses.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 30, 2013)

From what I hear, I'd give the Tamron a shot instead for sure, well providing you can't manage the 24-70 II which is completely awesome. 24-70 f/4 IS might also be worth a look if you can get one for some hundreds below the $1500 list.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 30, 2013)

OmarSV11 said:


> DXOMark list of the best glass for the 6D shows both Tamron zooms as the best for the camera...
> 
> http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Best-lenses-for-your-Canon-EOS-6D/Best-primes-and-zoom-for-the-Canon-EOS-6D
> 
> Personally I'll wait for Sigma to renew their 24-70 (f2 weee!) and dont know if it will happen, but, I hope they relaunch the 70-200 with the new Art/Sport construction soon.



While DxO mark may be good for sensors, the plots at least. I find them to be dubious when it comes to lenses. I mean they were the ones who said the 16-35mm excelled at the edges when used closest to wide open! That the f/2.8 IS was sharper at 200mm f/2.8 than the 2.8 non-IS than the 2.8 IS II! I believe they also claimed the 70-300 non-L was sharper than 70-300L and 300 f/4L!


----------



## Wildfire (Jul 30, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> While DxO mark may be good for sensors, the plots at least. I find them to be dubious when it comes to lenses. I mean they were the ones who said the 16-35mm excelled at the edges when used closest to wide open! That the f/2.8 IS was sharper at 200mm f/2.8 than the 2.8 non-IS than the 2.8 IS II! I believe they also claimed the 70-300 non-L was sharper than 70-300L and 300 f/4L!



How many copies of each lens/body do they test? I can't find their exact testing process anywhere on the site...


----------



## luciolepri (Jul 30, 2013)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> Hey Canon - are you seeing how EVERYONE on this CANON forum are recommending a 3rd party lens? Maybe it's time to change something.



+1


----------



## mrsfotografie (Jul 30, 2013)

luciolepri said:


> CarlMillerPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Hey Canon - are you seeing how EVERYONE on this CANON forum are recommending a 3rd party lens? Maybe it's time to change something.
> ...



+2. Tamron and Sigma are moving away from making alternative products that compete mostly on price - to premium quality products that equal or exceed the quality of the OEM item, while still selling at competitive prices. A really cool development IMHO.


----------



## brad-man (Jul 31, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> From what I hear, I'd give the Tamron a shot instead for sure, well providing you can't manage the 24-70 II which is completely awesome. 24-70 f/4 IS might also be worth a look if you can get one for some _many_ hundreds below the $1500 list.



Sorry. I just thought that needed fixing


----------

