FINALLY!! you are the first person I have found who actually does proper well explained comparisons! So much better than digitalrev and all of these other camera review channels! you have earned a SUB from me, I'm looking forward to seeing more from you in future! Keep up the good work!
Mate, now THAT was a review. You've got a subscriber. Being an 'active-reviews-watcher', I've never seen such a high quality job like the one you've done in this video. Hands down. Congratulations.
I'll go with Tamron, wayy cheaper + image stabilization, and a bit brighter in low light!! I mean are you kidding, it's worth the $$...... Great review by the way.
Thanks! I'll be making another soon... I've already done the shooting for it... and now I'm getting excited about testing the new Tamron 150-600 G2 :-)
Hi Dave, Shooting with the 5DIII, I found that the speed of the Tamron was actually slightly faster than the Canon, but they were almost identical. The test that I ran was one that I am not confident with, in terms of reliability, so I didn't publish the results, but I basically focused both lenses at the "infinity" range, then panned the tripod to an object close to the "near" limit of the Canon lens, and focused. The measurement was done by sound, and repeated to get an average.
This is probably the best comparison in the entire history of youtube, well except for one point. I really missed the video comparison in here, but apart from that, amazing work! Real image tests outside lab, funny comics towards the end, everything included :)
Thanks so much for the review, Matthew. I current have a 17-55 IS with a 7D and am selling some guitar and that current camera setup to move up to the Canon 6D but was pushing budget for the Canon 24-70 I. Knowing the Tamron is such a close competitor, and 1/3 less cost, makes me feel much more at ease with my budget and knowing I will not be compromising image quality (enough to matter) while also gaining some great VC that will be wonderful when trying to shoot indoors sans flash. Thanks again!
I just moved away from Seattle and seeing the shots from Golden Gardens makes me miss it so bad! The Olympics are so perfect when you can actually see them this time of year. Great comparison, thanks for the video!
Best online comparison/review on YT bar none! Thank you so much for taking the time to share your results, I was very close to buying the canon but have decided to purchase the Tamron instead, with that little difference I can't justify the extra expense. Thanks Again!!
That's by far the highest quality comparison video I've ever seen! The problem is I was at a loss on which lens to get between the L f/4 and 2.8 Canons. Now it's up between three.
This is the best comparison video I've seen yet. Keep up the great work. Thank you. I shoot mainly portraits weddings from time to time, and was fustrated between these two lens. Either Canon 24-70 f2.8 II or Tamron 24 70 vc + EF8-15 Fisheye. It is now clear to me that VC is going to be more what I need
Hi Matt, I would rank you among the best reviewers in the business! Great job on this one. Just FYI, I bought my Tamron 70-200mm based on my evaluation of your review in another review episode. Now that I am in the market for the 24-70mm I would once again value your analysis to help me in my decision-making process. Thanks for taking the time, please keep them coming.
Great review. Right now these lenses are on sale. The delta is $600 (1800 vs. 1200). I got the Canon because 1) better optics 2) better built quality 3) better compatibility - my 5D3 can correct vignetting, chromatic aberration, and distortion automatically on the Canon 4) Canon has higher QA than Tamron - some copies of Tamrons lenses are bad! I never shoot video so IS is less important to me. I am happy with the Canon.
Yep, I'll try to find a decent way to test it. While I was putting together this video, I decided that that method that I'd used was flawed... so I didn't include it. For what it's worth, I didn't see any significant difference. My tests showed that the tamron was slightly faster (hundreds of a second), but as I say... I'm not satisfied that those results are accurate.
For most people, it probably doesn't. However, if you're shooting in an environment where you need to be discreet, like on a film set (where a "blimp" might be required), or if you're shooting timid wildlife, or a quiet moment at a wedding, etc... it can be important. Also, if you shoot video and use AF (which is somewhat rare), you don't want the noise of the lens to be recorded on the sound channel...
Great review! As a beginner, I really struggle all of the lens reviews and option articles. This review is very clear with great visuals. Best lens review I've seen.
What an excellent, content-rich, and educational video! Thank you for creating this - you are brilliant, and earned a new subscriber! I've always like the Tamron ;) so now I'm glad to see the gear-lust I sometimes have may just be in my head...
Matthew, that was a well-balanced review. In fact, I believe this is one of the better ones I was able to find on this subject. So please post more man!
Hi Matthew. The production quality of your review is stunning and the content very informative. With out a doubt the best review I've seen on the these lenses. Thanks and I look forward to more reviews.
Excellent review. I just switched to Canon after 25 years of using Nikon, and have been in a dilemma over lenses, and written reviews just weren't helping much...this helped greatly. Thank you!
Hi Peter, True. I mention it in the article, but not the video. Maybe I'll make an annotation. They both claim to have weather sealing, but I didn't test it... and I'm not about to :) - Matthew
Thanks Luke. This is actually an older video... the 35mm review was just uploaded today :) I'll probably stick with the check list in future videos, though...
Hi Matt, I appreciate these comparisons that you have done. I recently purchased a Canon 6D and have purchased the Tamron 45mm f1.8 and the Tamron 100-400. I am shopping on a budget, but quality images are very important to me. My other camera is a Leica X Vario, that I only purchased for the lens performance...and definitely not the cameras handling performance. It is used as my snapshot, take it anywhere device. Cheers from Victoria. PS...I chuckled at your comment of a sunny day in Seattle.
Hey Sean, I did not... I don't do much video. My thinking when it comes to video is this: 1080p video is 1920 x 1080 pixels = about 2 megapixels. At that size (less than 10% of full 5D resolution), it's hard for me to believe that the minor optical differences in these lenses would be significant... and the Tamron's VC could be a big help. But as I say, I don't shoot video :)
Great review Matt, and thank you for spending the time to do the focal length calculations. It's a bit scary to me that you ran into these quality control issues with the very expensive Canon lens. For the price I would expect thorough performance testing of each unit before it leaves the factory. It would have been interesting to compare the two serial number Tamron lenses against each other, although I would guess the performance to be similar.
An EXCELLENT video review! Ive always wondered how the AF motor sounded, and now I know - a comparison that no video ive seen, actually shows. Very thorough and detailed. Subbed!
Hi Matthew, Excellent review. This is the first of your videos I have seen. Can you tell me what software you used to produce this video? Your presentation matches your actual review in term of quality; very nicely done.
So happy I came across this video. So often video reviews are just 10 minutes of badly produced wittering opinions, but yours is informative, to the point and brilliantly conveyed! Was looking into buying a second-hand Canon 24-70 L mk1, but after watching your video and doing some more side by side comparison, the Tamron is starting to look like the winner! Same money for higher specs and a 6 year warranty, how bad!
I don't need to say how good this review is BUT I'll say it anyway. It's very concise and conclusive which helps it making up my mind on what I want. I love how you through in the explanation of the Chromatic Aberration. I was just typing it into google when I heard you explaining it. Legend!
That was my initial suspicion, too.... but if that were the case, we'd have expected to see the same thing across the entire frame. In this case, it appeared that the images were focused in the same place in the center and towards the edge, but at the edge there was a difference. That's why I put in the dashed line, for reference.
I'm sold on the Tameron! Even though its not as sharp, like you said, no one goes to a gallery and say they really like the photo because it's sharp at the edges. I'd love some more of these videos too! I'm a new subscriber!
I bought the Tamron shortly after it was released, the only Tamron in my bag, and it's been all aces for me. The vc is the reason I love it next to its sharpness. Shooting people usually has them in the center of the frame, and it delivers. Great review that further confirms my personal experiences with it.
It's nice to see a review that actually takes the "third party" lens at its face value and determines whether it has earned that value. A lot of people forget that companies like Tamron and their ilk make an awful lot of lenses for an awful lot of manufacturers, with that manufacturer simply stamping their font and their brand name right on front. In the case of Tamron, a company where they manufacture more lenses in a four year span than Canon or Nikon have in their lifetimes, it should be noted that there is more than enough optical experience to back up their status as a proper first choice for photographers, not just as an alternative. Thanks for doing both brands justice. Much respect.
Hello Matt. Great comparison and the details you share are "right on" as I'm looking to pick up a used Tamron tomorrow. Thanks and I look forward to visiting Olympic NP again real soon.
I don't notice a particular yellow cast with the Tamron; some of the color differences in this video can be attributed to the fact that the image were shot several minutes apart on days with shifting clouds. More importantly, though, I've never met a color shift that I couldn't correct in ACR or Photoshop. :)
Jay, I haven't had any problems with either lens focusing in low light. Both of them have been very quick and accurate. (I haven't noticed any difference with the new 5D III firmware, but I guess I didn't expect to). That said, I have heard of a couple of people who have said that they had focusing trouble with the Tamron in low light. These were just people on forums, and I don't know whether there's something in it, or they're just blaming their equipment for their own failings :) - Matt
A bit late to the party, but I only just saw your comparative review. I had kind of come to the same conclusion you did, about spending my own money = get the Tamron. There is the issue about VC on the lens too. If the Tamron needs to be stopped down a couple of stops, to 'equal' the Canon, then, thats fine, as the VC allows you to do exactly that, while handholding. So you gain those stops with the excellent VC that you get with the lens. To me, this makes the Tamron somewhat superior as it is so close to the Canon with that VC in operation, that your money saved is money earned, without compromising quality. If you move to a tripod, and disable VC anyway, then you'll most likely be on F/8 or F/11 anyway, so again, equal to the Canon. As it happens, I am a Nikon user, but same arguments go for the Nikkor lens, which yeilds pretty much the same results as the Canon in your tests anyway. Thanks for the time you spend putting this together, I had just about got there by reading around a lot of other reviews but this one has convinced me to go Tamron. I have the SP 70-300 Di VC USD already, and thats a truly great lens too, worth a review if you shoot telephotos much.
Excellent decided to go with the Tamron because of the VC. This video was very instrumental in my decision as I shoot a lot of events in low light. I do love landscape and birding so then I will use my Canon EF 100-400mm L lS.
I can now easily choose the Tamron (I buy it for a D750 tho). Not only, that the image stabilization is pretty useful, but the sharpness can be improved in Lightroom. (it's not the same quality sharpness, but in practice it doesn't matter) I like the color rendering from the 2 big brands, but again those are altered in post-process anyways...
Hi Matthew, this is an amazing video comparison. Definitely one of the best even being 4-1/2 years old haha. Great work! I just ordered this Tamron 24-70 (not the new G2) and I already have done plenty of research and I know what to expect. But I'm still enjoying browsing videos like this. Makes the anticipation all the more exciting while the lens is in route lol. Also I aspire to be as knowledgeable as you are when it comes to truly understanding photography to this extent. You inspire me, pal. Thank you, and keep up the great work. You just gained a new sub... Cheers Greg
Hey Gregory, Glad you enjoyed it! I've just finished shooting for the new videos with the Sigma ART, Tamron G2, and the same Canon, along with a Canon f/4L IS. The videos will be coming over the next month or so. - Matthew
Hey, thanks for the reply! That sounds great. I'll definitely be on the lookout for those to be uploaded. Your work is really in a class of its own. I truly value it! Keep it up. Greg
Hi Thomas, This is a point well taken, and, of course, also why I provide the RAW files for you to compare for yourself (sharpened or otherwise). I compare the RAW files because I want to show the images in their most-different forms; sharpening and increases in contrast may close the gap between two lenses, even if applied equally to both, and that defeats the purpose of the comparison.
I have attended a photo session at Adorama, and a presenter was using Tamron 24-70mm F2.8 VC. After this session, I looked at other people's opinion about this lens inRUclips. I found your presentation of Canon vs Nikon. Your presentation material are excellent and as well as your talking. But your photo material are all landscaping photos. As far as I know, F2.8 and 70-100mm zone are good for portrait . why you did not mention about portrait? Please explain. Thanks
This is by far the best lens review channel on the internet, keep up the great work! I would like to see your review on the Canon 24-70mm F4 IS next to these two though, I bought the 24-70mm F4 cheap. And even my untrained eye can see that it is better than the 24-105L, but I would really like to see how it stacks up against the Tamron and it's more expensive Canon brother! Thanks in advance and have a nice day!
Matt, thanks a lot for the review. I'm in the market for a standard zoom and was weighing if spending the extra $$$ would be worth the slight sharpness with Canon. As it is, I'm on a budget so Tamron should suit me fine! As others have mentioned, fantastic review!
I didn't have any problems with the autofocus, though I spent a lot less time shooting action than I did still subjects. I've read some comments about it being slower to focus, but it's always hard to tell whether people are blaming their problems on the simplest thing at hand :) They have this Tamron at borrowlenses... that would be a quick way to settle the matter to your satisfaction, without spending a ton.
I think that either one would be fine for portraits; the Tamron's border issues at 70mm would not be relevant for most portraits... since the background will be soft anyway, usually. Local contrast is slightly higher in the Canon, but no so much that minor adjustments in post wouldn't make up for it. I'd probably go with the Tamron, for IS. I didn't find that the Tamron was any slower to focus than the Canon, but this may be a lens-by-lens issue.
great review, and great photos as well. the photos you show around the 11:00 minute mark are stunning. i hope to get good at those super sharp landscape photos
This is a great comparison video... I own a Nikon, but still like to see how the Tamron does at all extremes in all cases... First time finding your videos, definitely a subscriber now based on this one. Thanks
I really like the effort you put in the comparison. YOU EVEN COVERED THE CHROMATIC ABERRATION + you explained it really well. Keep up the good work. This is what the internet needs.
Hi, Matthew. I really enjoy your comparison videos. You have a lot of technical insights and your reviews are more detailed than many other reviewers. But there is one question about the Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC lens that I could not solve after almsot year of research and after watching all the review videos of it. I've heard that when Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC is paired with 5D mark III(its AF system), it has serious focusing issues when using outer focus points. Everyone was satisfied with the auto focus when using the center point. but it seemed a lot of people were having problem with the outer focus points. I really like the Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC better than Canon because it has VC but at the same time, I need to have accurate focus even when using outer points. There are times when I need to use AI Servo tracking mode, and when I am in AI servo, I usually turn on multiple focus points because it's really hard to keep the moving subject in the dead center. Plus I don't want to place the subject in the center everytime. For basic portrait shots, I can live with using center point but, I don't want to invest on a lens that has compromised auto focus performance when using outer points. Please can you test out the compatibility issue between 5D mark III and Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC? Some people say if you get a good copy, there is no problem. but Some people tried exchanging for new copies for more than 3 times and had the same issue on all of the copies. So it's really giving me a headache...
I would say that the Mark 1 is optically about on-par with the Tamron; it might be a little more contrasty at times, but the differences are minimal. Obviously, it doesn't have image stabilization, so... it would be hard for me not to pick the Tamron there.
Your voice reminds me of the kid from American History X, when he is doing his voiceovers (reading/writing his essay). Great video! I shoot Nikon but it was a great comparison and helpful
Thanks for the vid Matthew. I definitely found your side-by-sides very useful, but I'd have valued an equally thorough comparison at 28, 35, and 50 way more than a slight sidetrack into CA explanations, interesting though that may be. It is a 24-to-70mm after all, rather than a 24/70. I was most interested in the 28-40mm range as I already have good primes at 24 and 50mm, and am looking for a 70-200mm to cover the 70mm end. Great to see the 24 and 70mm images though. Gives the impression that the Tamron might be rather good at the 28-40mm range, though I'm still only guessing. Keep up the good work.
This video is a great help as I'm in the market for a new lens. The Tamron 24-70 2.8 will be my 1st non Canon lens purchase for my 70D (currently I own all STM Canon products 50 1.8, 24 2.8, 18-55 and 55-250 Kit lens). The Tamron will be used for weddings. The extra money saved will allow me to start a savings for my future 5D mk3
He's probably not going with the 17-55mm 2.8 because he is saving up for a 5D MK III which is a full frame camera and the 17-55mm is only meant for crop sensor. Once he goes full frame that 17-55mm will be useless.
Na the 18-55 and 55-250 STM,s both came with the camera, but T T got it correct... In planning to get a 5D mk3, I gotta think ahead when buying lenses... I now need lenses that a work on both cameras for the most part.
You are without doubt the best reviewer on youtube with great comparisons and calm manner. Will you be testing the new Tamron 24-70 G2?? Also,don't suppose you will test any Fugi stuff !!
In general, I don't think that ANY APS-C can match a good full-frame sensor in low light... noise is always going to be a concern. There are also some difficulties with Fuji and using flash equipment, though they're not a huge concern, and more options are becoming available for Fuji. I don't find it to be an issue when I shoot RAW, but some people claim that Fuji's X sensors cause "waxy" skin tones. You can Google that and see if you agree. That said, many of Fuji's lenses are really excellent, and there are enough large aperture primes to be able to get nice shallow depth of field and plenty of sharpness. Autofocus and general speed are great. I've never shot Fuji video, so I can't really comment there. And, of course, no full-frame Canon can match the Fuji for its size and weight and general portability.
I've found the XT2 can match my 6D in good light and is a joy to use, but i can't get the same level of performance in low light and actually find the EVF a disadvantage compared to OVF and the dynamic range is way inferior in low light, maybe i'm doing something wrong. I've been through the waxy tone problem and found i could get rid of it by dropping sharpness to -1or2 and noise reduction by -4.
FINALLY!! you are the first person I have found who actually does proper well explained comparisons! So much better than digitalrev and all of these other camera review channels! you have earned a SUB from me, I'm looking forward to seeing more from you in future! Keep up the good work!
You have to check out Christopher Frost Photography too, my favorite lens reviewer on youtube.
@@Xzizia92 And Abbott, Dustin
Mate, now THAT was a review. You've got a subscriber. Being an 'active-reviews-watcher', I've never seen such a high quality job like the one you've done in this video. Hands down. Congratulations.
I'll go with Tamron, wayy cheaper + image stabilization, and a bit brighter in low light!! I mean are you kidding, it's worth the $$...... Great review by the way.
I think your videos are one of the best on RUclips. Well done and keep it up. Very professional and detailed.
Thanks! I'll be making another soon... I've already done the shooting for it... and now I'm getting excited about testing the new Tamron 150-600 G2 :-)
+Matthew Gore awesome! perfect timing I am looking into this lens. Your thoroughness and analytical reviews are top notch!
Hi Dave,
Shooting with the 5DIII, I found that the speed of the Tamron was actually slightly faster than the Canon, but they were almost identical. The test that I ran was one that I am not confident with, in terms of reliability, so I didn't publish the results, but I basically focused both lenses at the "infinity" range, then panned the tripod to an object close to the "near" limit of the Canon lens, and focused. The measurement was done by sound, and repeated to get an average.
This is probably the best comparison in the entire history of youtube, well except for one point. I really missed the video comparison in here, but apart from that, amazing work!
Real image tests outside lab, funny comics towards the end, everything included :)
Hey Matt! I love your style and way of presenting the information. Very clear and to the point. Keep up the great work!
Just wanna say this is by far the best review I have seen and I have seen A LOT of reviews.
The best lens comparison video I've seen on RUclips...thanks.
Mannnnnnn! I needed to see this two days ago. Canon 24-70 is arriving today!
Thanks so much for the review, Matthew.
I current have a 17-55 IS with a 7D and am selling some guitar and that current camera setup to move up to the Canon 6D but was pushing budget for the Canon 24-70 I. Knowing the Tamron is such a close competitor, and 1/3 less cost, makes me feel much more at ease with my budget and knowing I will not be compromising image quality (enough to matter) while also gaining some great VC that will be wonderful when trying to shoot indoors sans flash.
Thanks again!
How that kit working for you becouse am trying to get the 17-55 lens hows the lens in your opinion
one of the best lens reviews i have seen, subbed!
I just moved away from Seattle and seeing the shots from Golden Gardens makes me miss it so bad! The Olympics are so perfect when you can actually see them this time of year. Great comparison, thanks for the video!
Those photos at the end were stunningly beautiful
Thanks, James!
This is one of the best review videos of any product I have ever seen great job
Another great review! The chromatic aberration was very well explained. Thanks for all the work it's very helpful
Thanks, Matthew. As an amateur who just upgraded to full frame, this review made all the difference in my decision to go with Tamron.
Best online comparison/review on YT bar none! Thank you so much for taking the time to share your results, I was very close to buying the canon but have decided to purchase the Tamron instead, with that little difference I can't justify the extra expense. Thanks Again!!
Love this review. I tested both and the difference wasn't enough to warrant the price of the Canon. I bought the Tamron, as well as the Tamron 70-200.
That's by far the highest quality comparison video I've ever seen! The problem is I was at a loss on which lens to get between the L f/4 and 2.8 Canons. Now it's up between three.
so nice to watch and well done video, calm, peaceful, and facts and good samples, keep the good job man !
This is the best comparison video I've seen yet. Keep up the great work. Thank you. I shoot mainly portraits weddings from time to time, and was fustrated between these two lens. Either Canon 24-70 f2.8 II or Tamron 24 70 vc + EF8-15 Fisheye. It is now clear to me that VC is going to be more what I need
Hi Matt, I would rank you among the best reviewers in the business! Great job on this one. Just FYI, I bought my Tamron 70-200mm based on my evaluation of your review in another review episode. Now that I am in the market for the 24-70mm I would once again value your analysis to help me in my decision-making process. Thanks for taking the time, please keep them coming.
Great review. Right now these lenses are on sale. The delta is $600 (1800 vs. 1200). I got the Canon because 1) better optics 2) better built quality 3) better compatibility - my 5D3 can correct vignetting, chromatic aberration, and distortion automatically on the Canon 4) Canon has higher QA than Tamron - some copies of Tamrons lenses are bad! I never shoot video so IS is less important to me. I am happy with the Canon.
I always come back to you for camera gear reviews!!!! You are one of the best ones out there!!!!!!
Yep, I'll try to find a decent way to test it. While I was putting together this video, I decided that that method that I'd used was flawed... so I didn't include it. For what it's worth, I didn't see any significant difference. My tests showed that the tamron was slightly faster (hundreds of a second), but as I say... I'm not satisfied that those results are accurate.
Excellent production and the comparison was clearly defined by the methodology. I like the style and structure of your approach.
For most people, it probably doesn't. However, if you're shooting in an environment where you need to be discreet, like on a film set (where a "blimp" might be required), or if you're shooting timid wildlife, or a quiet moment at a wedding, etc... it can be important. Also, if you shoot video and use AF (which is somewhat rare), you don't want the noise of the lens to be recorded on the sound channel...
Great review! As a beginner, I really struggle all of the lens reviews and option articles. This review is very clear with great visuals. Best lens review I've seen.
What an excellent, content-rich, and educational video! Thank you for creating this - you are brilliant, and earned a new subscriber! I've always like the Tamron ;) so now I'm glad to see the gear-lust I sometimes have may just be in my head...
I don't really used to comment on videos, but this comparison is just excellent. I doubt I've ever seen a so high quality work in this topic before.
Extraordinary great review video. One of the best I have seen on youtube so far.
Great example shots too! Keep on like this!
Matthew, that was a well-balanced review. In fact, I believe this is one of the better ones I was able to find on this subject. So please post more man!
Hi Matthew. The production quality of your review is stunning and the content very informative. With out a doubt the best review I've seen on the these lenses. Thanks and I look forward to more reviews.
The last sentence in the review put it in crystal clear view, everything just snapped into place. Thanks, I'm going with the Tamron. Awesome review.
Excellent review. I just switched to Canon after 25 years of using Nikon, and have been in a dilemma over lenses, and written reviews just weren't helping much...this helped greatly. Thank you!
Hi Peter,
True. I mention it in the article, but not the video. Maybe I'll make an annotation. They both claim to have weather sealing, but I didn't test it... and I'm not about to :)
- Matthew
Thanks, it's always good to hear feedback from actual owners.
Thanks Luke. This is actually an older video... the 35mm review was just uploaded today :) I'll probably stick with the check list in future videos, though...
Best lens review I've seen on RUclips. Thanks!
Hi Matt, I appreciate these comparisons that you have done. I recently purchased a Canon 6D and have purchased the Tamron 45mm f1.8 and the Tamron 100-400. I am shopping on a budget, but quality images are very important to me. My other camera is a Leica X Vario, that I only purchased for the lens performance...and definitely not the cameras handling performance. It is used as my snapshot, take it anywhere device. Cheers from Victoria. PS...I chuckled at your comment of a sunny day in Seattle.
Hey Sean,
I did not... I don't do much video. My thinking when it comes to video is this:
1080p video is 1920 x 1080 pixels = about 2 megapixels. At that size (less than 10% of full 5D resolution), it's hard for me to believe that the minor optical differences in these lenses would be significant... and the Tamron's VC could be a big help. But as I say, I don't shoot video :)
Great review Matt, and thank you for spending the time to do the focal length calculations. It's a bit scary to me that you ran into these quality control issues with the very expensive Canon lens. For the price I would expect thorough performance testing of each unit before it leaves the factory. It would have been interesting to compare the two serial number Tamron lenses against each other, although I would guess the performance to be similar.
An EXCELLENT video review! Ive always wondered how the AF motor sounded, and now I know - a comparison that no video ive seen, actually shows. Very thorough and detailed. Subbed!
Hi Matthew,
Excellent review. This is the first of your videos I have seen. Can you tell me what software you used to produce this video? Your presentation matches your actual review in term of quality; very nicely done.
So happy I came across this video. So often video reviews are just 10 minutes of badly produced wittering opinions, but yours is informative, to the point and brilliantly conveyed!
Was looking into buying a second-hand Canon 24-70 L mk1, but after watching your video and doing some more side by side comparison, the Tamron is starting to look like the winner! Same money for higher specs and a 6 year warranty, how bad!
Thanks for putting this together - Props to the individuals who make the most helpful content for the consumer population!
Great review. The first of your work I have seen. I appreciate that you cover both the technical aspects as well as real-world usage.
Top notch review. Best I've seen on the net. Well done!!
Very nice and helpful review... I doubt the soft edges on the tamron at 2.8 will matter as who shoots landscapes that wide.
very professional review! Too bad for me only pictures and no video samples. I need to decide between these for my NEX-EA0 camcorder.
Nice, Tamron you are the next lens I am buying!
I don't need to say how good this review is BUT I'll say it anyway. It's very concise and conclusive which helps it making up my mind on what I want.
I love how you through in the explanation of the Chromatic Aberration. I was just typing it into google when I heard you explaining it. Legend!
That was my initial suspicion, too.... but if that were the case, we'd have expected to see the same thing across the entire frame. In this case, it appeared that the images were focused in the same place in the center and towards the edge, but at the edge there was a difference. That's why I put in the dashed line, for reference.
I'm sold on the Tameron! Even though its not as sharp, like you said, no one goes to a gallery and say they really like the photo because it's sharp at the edges. I'd love some more of these videos too! I'm a new subscriber!
I bought the Tamron shortly after it was released, the only Tamron in my bag, and it's been all aces for me. The vc is the reason I love it next to its sharpness. Shooting people usually has them in the center of the frame, and it delivers. Great review that further confirms my personal experiences with it.
Excellent Vid! I had the Tamron 24-70 F/2.8 and I'm still kicking myself for letting it go. I'm buying it again in the fall w/ a new body!
Awesome Comparison mate, very well put together and seemed unbiased. Best lens video I've seen so far.
It's nice to see a review that actually takes the "third party" lens at its face value and determines whether it has earned that value. A lot of people forget that companies like Tamron and their ilk make an awful lot of lenses for an awful lot of manufacturers, with that manufacturer simply stamping their font and their brand name right on front. In the case of Tamron, a company where they manufacture more lenses in a four year span than Canon or Nikon have in their lifetimes, it should be noted that there is more than enough optical experience to back up their status as a proper first choice for photographers, not just as an alternative.
Thanks for doing both brands justice. Much respect.
Hello Matt. Great comparison and the details you share are "right on" as I'm looking to pick up a used Tamron tomorrow. Thanks and I look forward to visiting Olympic NP again real soon.
I don't notice a particular yellow cast with the Tamron; some of the color differences in this video can be attributed to the fact that the image were shot several minutes apart on days with shifting clouds.
More importantly, though, I've never met a color shift that I couldn't correct in ACR or Photoshop. :)
This answered exactly the questions I was needing answer in a very clear way thanks
You give the type comparisons that I love. I'll definitely be watching more of your videos and recommend you to people, good work!
Thank you SOOO so much! It's so hard to find good reviews. Especially as a 'beginner' this really helped me decide what type of lens to go with.
Jay,
I haven't had any problems with either lens focusing in low light. Both of them have been very quick and accurate. (I haven't noticed any difference with the new 5D III firmware, but I guess I didn't expect to).
That said, I have heard of a couple of people who have said that they had focusing trouble with the Tamron in low light. These were just people on forums, and I don't know whether there's something in it, or they're just blaming their equipment for their own failings :)
- Matt
A bit late to the party, but I only just saw your comparative review. I had kind of come to the same conclusion you did, about spending my own money = get the Tamron.
There is the issue about VC on the lens too. If the Tamron needs to be stopped down a couple of stops, to 'equal' the Canon, then, thats fine, as the VC allows you to do exactly that, while handholding. So you gain those stops with the excellent VC that you get with the lens.
To me, this makes the Tamron somewhat superior as it is so close to the Canon with that VC in operation, that your money saved is money earned, without compromising quality.
If you move to a tripod, and disable VC anyway, then you'll most likely be on F/8 or F/11 anyway, so again, equal to the Canon.
As it happens, I am a Nikon user, but same arguments go for the Nikkor lens, which yeilds pretty much the same results as the Canon in your tests anyway.
Thanks for the time you spend putting this together, I had just about got there by reading around a lot of other reviews but this one has convinced me to go Tamron.
I have the SP 70-300 Di VC USD already, and thats a truly great lens too, worth a review if you shoot telephotos much.
Thanks Ross. I agree about the Tamron 70-300... it's better than the Canon equivalent, and the Canon is a good lens.
Excellent decided to go with the Tamron because of the VC. This video was very instrumental in my decision as I shoot a lot of events in low light. I do love landscape and birding so then I will use my Canon EF 100-400mm L lS.
I can now easily choose the Tamron (I buy it for a D750 tho). Not only, that the image stabilization is pretty useful, but the sharpness can be improved in Lightroom. (it's not the same quality sharpness, but in practice it doesn't matter)
I like the color rendering from the 2 big brands, but again those are altered in post-process anyways...
Hi Matthew, this is an amazing video comparison. Definitely one of the best even being 4-1/2 years old haha. Great work! I just ordered this Tamron 24-70 (not the new G2) and I already have done plenty of research and I know what to expect. But I'm still enjoying browsing videos like this. Makes the anticipation all the more exciting while the lens is in route lol. Also I aspire to be as knowledgeable as you are when it comes to truly understanding photography to this extent. You inspire me, pal. Thank you, and keep up the great work. You just gained a new sub... Cheers
Greg
Hey Gregory,
Glad you enjoyed it! I've just finished shooting for the new videos with the Sigma ART, Tamron G2, and the same Canon, along with a Canon f/4L IS. The videos will be coming over the next month or so.
- Matthew
Hey, thanks for the reply! That sounds great. I'll definitely be on the lookout for those to be uploaded. Your work is really in a class of its own. I truly value it! Keep it up.
Greg
Hi Thomas,
This is a point well taken, and, of course, also why I provide the RAW files for you to compare for yourself (sharpened or otherwise). I compare the RAW files because I want to show the images in their most-different forms; sharpening and increases in contrast may close the gap between two lenses, even if applied equally to both, and that defeats the purpose of the comparison.
Very good comparison, done in a practical way ! Thanks for that. Eric
I have attended a photo session at Adorama, and a presenter was using Tamron 24-70mm F2.8 VC. After this session, I looked at other people's opinion about this lens inRUclips. I found your presentation of Canon vs Nikon. Your presentation material are excellent and as well as your talking. But your photo material are all landscaping photos. As far as I know, F2.8 and 70-100mm zone are good for portrait . why you did not mention about portrait? Please explain. Thanks
Matt thanks for all the work you put into your videos, they are fantastic.
This is by far the best lens review channel on the internet, keep up the great work! I would like to see your review on the Canon 24-70mm F4 IS next to these two though, I bought the 24-70mm F4 cheap. And even my untrained eye can see that it is better than the 24-105L, but I would really like to see how it stacks up against the Tamron and it's more expensive Canon brother! Thanks in advance and have a nice day!
Excellent Video Matthew! Wow! Very well put together.
Matt, thanks a lot for the review. I'm in the market for a standard zoom and was weighing if spending the extra $$$ would be worth the slight sharpness with Canon. As it is, I'm on a budget so Tamron should suit me fine! As others have mentioned, fantastic review!
+skyknightmm Thanks! Glad you found it useful :)
That was probably the best review/comparison I've ever seen. Keep it up!
I didn't have any problems with the autofocus, though I spent a lot less time shooting action than I did still subjects. I've read some comments about it being slower to focus, but it's always hard to tell whether people are blaming their problems on the simplest thing at hand :) They have this Tamron at borrowlenses... that would be a quick way to settle the matter to your satisfaction, without spending a ton.
I think that either one would be fine for portraits; the Tamron's border issues at 70mm would not be relevant for most portraits... since the background will be soft anyway, usually. Local contrast is slightly higher in the Canon, but no so much that minor adjustments in post wouldn't make up for it. I'd probably go with the Tamron, for IS.
I didn't find that the Tamron was any slower to focus than the Canon, but this may be a lens-by-lens issue.
I just bought the tamron and its working absolutely fine..btw i am not trying to give you any advice just thought it would be helpful. thank you
Your review was awesome!! You certainly got my thumbs up. Did you ever do a review on best lenses for video?
great review, and great photos as well. the photos you show around the 11:00 minute mark are stunning. i hope to get good at those super sharp landscape photos
Thanks, that makes sense about when using a blimp because normally I'd think the shutter would be much louder.
Awesome video. One of the most informative and well produced videos I've watched. Thanks a lot for sharing.
This is a great comparison video... I own a Nikon, but still like to see how the Tamron does at all extremes in all cases... First time finding your videos, definitely a subscriber now based on this one. Thanks
Excellent review done for average people,like me. Love the gallery illustration!!! Thanks Matt for taking the time to do this!
One of the best reviews I have seen.... Thank you Matthew...
I really like the effort you put in the comparison. YOU EVEN COVERED THE CHROMATIC ABERRATION + you explained it really well. Keep up the good work. This is what the internet needs.
Hi, Matthew. I really enjoy your comparison videos. You have a lot of technical insights and your reviews are more detailed than many other reviewers. But there is one question about the Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC lens that I could not solve after almsot year of research and after watching all the review videos of it. I've heard that when Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC is paired with 5D mark III(its AF system), it has serious focusing issues when using outer focus points. Everyone was satisfied with the auto focus when using the center point. but it seemed a lot of people were having problem with the outer focus points. I really like the Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC better than Canon because it has VC but at the same time, I need to have accurate focus even when using outer points. There are times when I need to use AI Servo tracking mode, and when I am in AI servo, I usually turn on multiple focus points because it's really hard to keep the moving subject in the dead center. Plus I don't want to place the subject in the center everytime. For basic portrait shots, I can live with using center point but, I don't want to invest on a lens that has compromised auto focus performance when using outer points. Please can you test out the compatibility issue between 5D mark III and Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC? Some people say if you get a good copy, there is no problem. but Some people tried exchanging for new copies for more than 3 times and had the same issue on all of the copies. So it's really giving me a headache...
Thank you for your prompt response Matthew. I have never considered making videos with photoshop.
I would say that the Mark 1 is optically about on-par with the Tamron; it might be a little more contrasty at times, but the differences are minimal. Obviously, it doesn't have image stabilization, so... it would be hard for me not to pick the Tamron there.
Awesomely done comparison video! Thank you very much for taking the time to put this together and sharing.
Your voice reminds me of the kid from American History X, when he is doing his voiceovers (reading/writing his essay). Great video! I shoot Nikon but it was a great comparison and helpful
Thanks for the vid Matthew. I definitely found your side-by-sides very useful, but I'd have valued an equally thorough comparison at 28, 35, and 50 way more than a slight sidetrack into CA explanations, interesting though that may be. It is a 24-to-70mm after all, rather than a 24/70. I was most interested in the 28-40mm range as I already have good primes at 24 and 50mm, and am looking for a 70-200mm to cover the 70mm end. Great to see the 24 and 70mm images though. Gives the impression that the Tamron might be rather good at the 28-40mm range, though I'm still only guessing. Keep up the good work.
This video is a great help as I'm in the market for a new lens. The Tamron 24-70 2.8 will be my 1st non Canon lens purchase for my 70D (currently I own all STM Canon products 50 1.8, 24 2.8, 18-55 and 55-250 Kit lens). The Tamron will be used for weddings. The extra money saved will allow me to start a savings for my future 5D mk3
Why not go wih the EFS 17-55? It's made for crop and is basically the 24-70 of the crop sensor world
He's probably not going with the 17-55mm 2.8 because he is saving up for a 5D MK III which is a full frame camera and the 17-55mm is only meant for crop sensor. Once he goes full frame that 17-55mm will be useless.
EXACTLY gotta stop buying lenses that only work for one type of camera...Triple Tap we see eye to eye...thanks
Na the 18-55 and 55-250 STM,s both came with the camera, but T T got it correct... In planning to get a 5D mk3, I gotta think ahead when buying lenses... I now need lenses that a work on both cameras for the most part.
go with the new canon 24-105 F4 it comes out Oct 31
You are without doubt the best reviewer on youtube with great comparisons and calm manner. Will you be testing the new Tamron 24-70 G2?? Also,don't suppose you will test any Fugi stuff !!
Steve Moore Thanks, Steve. I'll be getting the G2 in a few weeks. Probably no Fuji stuff soon :-)
I'll look forward to the G2,could help make up my mind between Canon and Fugi, thanks, Steve.
In your opinion,can Fugi (XT2)match Canon (Full Frame)for weddings etc ??
In general, I don't think that ANY APS-C can match a good full-frame sensor in low light... noise is always going to be a concern. There are also some difficulties with Fuji and using flash equipment, though they're not a huge concern, and more options are becoming available for Fuji. I don't find it to be an issue when I shoot RAW, but some people claim that Fuji's X sensors cause "waxy" skin tones. You can Google that and see if you agree.
That said, many of Fuji's lenses are really excellent, and there are enough large aperture primes to be able to get nice shallow depth of field and plenty of sharpness. Autofocus and general speed are great. I've never shot Fuji video, so I can't really comment there.
And, of course, no full-frame Canon can match the Fuji for its size and weight and general portability.
I've found the XT2 can match my 6D in good light and is a joy to use, but i can't get the same level of performance in low light and actually find the EVF a disadvantage compared to OVF and the dynamic range is way inferior in low light, maybe i'm doing something wrong. I've been through the waxy tone problem and found i could get rid of it by dropping sharpness to -1or2 and noise reduction by -4.
Thanks so much for this video! You explained the differences better than anyone else I've come across.
Great review! Thank you for creating it! Definitely helped me make a decision. Going with the Tamron for the stabilization and cost.
Cheers!
Outstanding comparison review. Good humor, packed information, which is well presented. Thank you for educating us.
Great review even 3 years later thank you!