Thanks for checking the video out! This was shot on the Sony Zeiss 24mm F2. Check out our blog on The Camera Store's site to see detailed descriptions of the gear used. Jordan @ The Camera Store TV
There is something about these videos that I never notice when watching any other videos on youtube. The same sort of feeling you get when watching a movie... What im trying to say is these are incredibly well produced with great "presenters" with great clear and appealing voices and all of that thrown together just makes it feel like a prime time TV show. So yeah. well done for that!
If you are using the viewfinder, the T4i will always be loud. Shooting in liveview will reduce shutter sound substantially. If you are after a very quiet shutter, check out the Panasonic GH3. It can shoot with a silent electronic shutter. Jordan @ The Camera Store TV
I would actually recommend the Tamron instead. The edge sharpness is the primary selling point of the Canon 24-70 II, and the crop factor of the C100 would make that irrelevant. Also, as mentioned in the video, the Tamron has a stabilizer which will make your handheld work on the C100 much less wobbly. Also, you'll save $1000. Jordan @ The Camera Store TV
We live in a small section of North America often referred to as 'Canada', which defies the Imperial measuring systems, and celebrates the joys of the Metric system! Jordan @ The Camera Store TV
I have had the Canon 2.8... and after buying the Tamron 2.8 VC... I was blown by the quality and how far better quality they are now, I am sticking with the Tamron.
Errr... No... Even at night you would not want to shoot at 2.8 because your Depth of Field would be so shallow that most of your landscape shot would be out of Focus...
it depends on the shot, if most of the landscape is far enough away that it is in focus at infinity then it wouldn't really be an issue (if the lens was sharp corner to corner at f/2.8) Edit: sorry, just noticed how old your comment is, sorry for comment necromancy
cheatingthesystem21 This JjSands guy is a jerk and a troll. The fact is, without IS there is no justification in buying this lens. People are not going to buy a lens like this for versatility or general purpose. If that was the case, they would buy the 24-70 F4 L for $999.00. People want a lens like this for the speed. F2.8, to shoot indoors, at night and artistic photography. In which case there are a few different directions you can go without spending as much money. For instance, there are two lenses from Sigma with excellent reviews and are being used by many pros: The Sigma 18-35 1.8 for $799.00 and the 50mm 1.4 art lens for $949.00. You can buy both those lenses and still have money for a case of beer. Of course I'm talking still photography.
I just sold the 10-year old Canon 24-70 f/2.8 and after serious considerartions ended up with the Tamron which I have been trying now for two days only. The picture quality is very much better than with the old Canon. I can see distortion this way on wide angle and that way on the tele side. Tele, sort of, call it long normal. I see quite remarkable vignetting which surprises me, it is on the long end. Autofocus is accurate, the wide open shots are sharp where you want them to. Then the VC or IS or whatever you want to call it. With the Canon 5DIII the picture quality degrades at high ISO. The extra couple of EVs provided by the stabilizer come in handy here -unless, of course you are shooting moving subjects. This was essentially the reason why I picked the Tamron...the asthma medication I need now makes my hands shake and, well...there is not much else you can do if you want to shoot hand held...
I have the Tamron 24-70mm lens and love it -- no issues whatsoever. No play between the camera and lens with my 24-70mm…it's absolutely tight and solid on my lowly D7000 body. Can't see paying double the price for a lens that doesn't even have VC! The Tamron 70-200mm lens will be my next lens.
I honestly don't think the Canon would be worth the extra money on a crop body. The Tamron is exceptional in the centre 80% of the image. With the Canon you are largely paying for the outstanding edge to edge performance on a full frame. Jordan @ The Camera Store TV
A decent one? Something larger than your computer screen. Something to display on a wall, to be proud of. I understand what your saying but if you missed the focus and could have hit it you missed the picture. Maybe it's just me but I wouldn't be satisfied with an image knowing it could have been better if it was focused. And I would say sharpness is how true the detail of whatever you're capturing is to the actual thing. That tamron image that was pointed out in the original comment is not focused at all. Even if you scaled it back down the IQ of the canon would be much better. In this specific situation
Do both of these lenses make noises when shooting videos? Like using VC & F stop & focus & zooming during video shots. Nice clips to share to the world.
I bought the Tamron earlier this year & never once regretted it. Which is not to say that the Canon is not superb. I'm just totally happy with my choice. Especially considering the VC & the price. In short, Tamron's a great performer!!
when is IS a must have? only for videos? I got the canon 24-70mm F/2.8 ii and I was told no having IS is not a big issue since I can compensate for it, but in what situations is a must have and that I can't do any type of adjustments in aperture or S.S? thanks
It's optical image stabilization so it doesn't affect the image quality, although I would turn it off when the camera is on a tripod. Also, as much as I wish Canon would give the 24-70 IS, I doubt it will happen anytime soon.
is there any way to silence the shutter on the T4i. i take a lot of wildlife photos and the noise is crazy loud. if there is no way to silence it then what camera would you recommend that matches or nearly matches the quality of the t4i. thanks for your time
How do you think this version of the Canon 24-70 would fare on the upcoming Canon EOS C100 cinema line camera? A good fit for video shooting? Or? Because I'm not so sure that camera offers or can offer OIS. Thanks!
Also if you shoot sports, you're probably not going to use a 24-70. You'll be renting a 400 or greater. Or if it's indoor or close outdoor action, at the very least you'll be going for the 70-200 f/2.8, and that's a different lens shootout which I don't believe you've covered yet. Is the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC (newer version) vs the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS on the schedule yet?
Why when you test distortion at 24mm , you show only part of the wall or you was close to the wall? while in Tamron test you have bigger amount of bricks.
Canon is silly they put an IS with a Macro feature on the same as this one but brought the f/2.8 to f/4 which I don't understand why. one reason was lost weight. Also they put the pinch cap on the f.4 but not on the f/2.8. Mr CameraStoreTV can you do a compare of Canon 24-70mm f.2.8 II USM with Canon 24-70mm f/4 IS USM. canon said the f4 can shoot good fast in low lighting they have new lens technology. is it true? or BS? I need to know to buy which for a budge
Tamron lenses are amazing. I've been using a 17-50 on a Nikon D90 for 4-5 years at least and it is amazing. You could say they are "value" lenses but that makes them sound cheap. I get pro results and sharpness with the Tamron I'm using everyday. I'll also say Sigma makes amazing stuff. I rented their newest 70-200 recently for a wedding and was blown away by the quality of it.
Hey guys! Nice video! Did you had the VC on or off when took the auto focus speed challenge? I think, that this will influence the duration of focusing a lot.
My 70-300mm Tamron lens was a suuuper cheap alternative to a Nikon one, but without image stabilization, it's quite tough to take nice pics at 1/100 shutter speed or less, unless you follow the subject perfectly. Also at F4 you get noticeable chromatic aberration. For a fraction of the Nikon lens, and if you play around its limitations, it's great, but you don't get the ease of use of the higher quality lens.
I've had the Tammy 3 different times over a 3 yr period & could never fall in love with it! It shot sharper with the VC off but still didn't love it, bought the Mark II & not only got rid of the Tammy I no longer needed my 35mm prime any more:)
Steve MacDonald the 35 prime is still 2 stops faster. i won't be getting rid of mine. you also can't replicate the look with the 24-70 either. ie background blur.
I bought the Tamron and found it to be very soft and sold it back on Ebay. The 50 f1.4 I replaced it with is way sharper. Having said that I'd probably buy it again after I pick up a FF camera. The 24-70 on a cropped sensor blows you know what.
The Canon is my go to lens for most of my work. I shoot it through camera blimps and I need a very quick focusing lens and I need sharpness from corner to corner at 2.8. I traded my old Canon 24-70 lens for the newer one and I am very happy. It is a much better lens than the old version. Not happy about the cost but this is the tool of my trade. Canon really needs to put an IS in this lens. Talked to a Canon rep and he said if IS was installed it would reduce the sharpness.
Excellent review. I was all set to go with the Tamron because the VC would make it a nice walk around lens, where my hand holding capability will be suffering by the end of a long day. But, watching the video, I'm now leaning towards the 24-70. I'll be keeping my 24-105 for walk around duty. Edge-sharpness of the Canon might mean I can hold off buying a dedicated landscape prime for a little while longer. The faster AF can also be a big deal.
I should add that I have the original Canon 24-70mm on my 60d, and LOVE it. It is so consistently sharp and fast - sure not thinking about replacing it any time soon.
I have budget issues and in my country the Sigma is a lot cheaper than the Tamron.So should I consider taking Sigma or wait for months then buy the Tamron. And also how good is the Sigma in terms of video?
Tamron has terrible quality control. Reading the forms some people have to buy several copies of the lens before getting an acceptable one. I purchased 3 and gave the fuck up. All terrible back focusing or just missing focus.
Thanks for the reply.. finally I sold out the lens after a lot of struggle.. I can't think of exchange because my friend bought this for me to Singapore from USA. .. no one mentioned such a thin in any of these reviews :(
Exactly, I read several reviews with no mention of it either. Take a look at the reviews on Amazon..there are several people complaining about it. Something fishy going on for sure.
i had a question ive been using mark 3 for awhile and loving it .. i wanted to purchase a new lens and am confused between three lenses .. the first one is a carl zeiss 25mm f2 which has no chromatic aberration .. and second being the 16-35mm f2.8 II and third being 24-70 f2.8 II am not sure which is the best choice .. i already own a Zeiss 18mm,50mm and 85mm and a canon 70-300 L so which one would you choose out out of the three please let me know thanks
Im sold on the Canon in every way except the fact that it doesn't have IS. I shoot both video and photography and I feel that spending all of this money on a lens with no IS will hurt me during video production. I have a range of other lenses however so I would be covered on a video shoot for other options, but i'm worried about seeing the negative effects of no IS on a ridiculously expensive lens. Any suggestions/other alternatives?
hey, i know u've done Sony A7. My question is will the VC work on Tamron 24-70 attached to Sony A7 through LA-EA4 adapter? Can you do a review on this? thx a bunch
It's hard to say. The Canon at 24mm was close to the wall (5.5 bricks across) and the Tamron was further back (10.5 bricks across). They should have mounted them on the same tripod so it would be the exact same image. Only then would we truly see the difference. On a side note, I've heard that this Tamron is at least as good (if not better) than Canon's ver I.
Thanks for the review! If you had to choose between the tamron and 24-105, which one would you take? Both about the same price and have vc/is; one is faster, but the other has more range. How would you rate the IQ in the comparable range; big difference? Thanks for your thoughts!
I'm mostly a video guy and wanted to know what would be a better buy the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC or the New Canon 24-70mm f/4L IS. Would that extra 200 bucks be worth the money being its an L glass or would that 2.8 on the Tamron be worth getting over the Canon?
Thanks for checking the video out! This was shot on the Sony Zeiss 24mm F2. Check out our blog on The Camera Store's site to see detailed descriptions of the gear used.
Jordan @ The Camera Store TV
There is something about these videos that I never notice when watching any other videos on youtube. The same sort of feeling you get when watching a movie...
What im trying to say is these are incredibly well produced with great "presenters" with great clear and appealing voices and all of that thrown together just makes it feel like a prime time TV show.
So yeah. well done for that!
If you are using the viewfinder, the T4i will always be loud. Shooting in liveview will reduce shutter sound substantially. If you are after a very quiet shutter, check out the Panasonic GH3. It can shoot with a silent electronic shutter.
Jordan @ The Camera Store TV
I would actually recommend the Tamron instead. The edge sharpness is the primary selling point of the Canon 24-70 II, and the crop factor of the C100 would make that irrelevant. Also, as mentioned in the video, the Tamron has a stabilizer which will make your handheld work on the C100 much less wobbly.
Also, you'll save $1000.
Jordan @ The Camera Store TV
We live in a small section of North America often referred to as 'Canada', which defies the Imperial measuring systems, and celebrates the joys of the Metric system!
Jordan @ The Camera Store TV
Absolutely. I'd be very comfortable shooting the Tamron handheld.
I have had the Canon 2.8... and after buying the Tamron 2.8 VC... I was blown by the quality and how far better quality they are now, I am sticking with the Tamron.
Nobody shoots landscape at 2.8, if stopped down the corner to corner sharpness improves than it doesn't matter.
except for nightime landscapes...
Not really, you can put the camera on a tripod, keep the aperture small and just keep decreasing the shutter speed ;-)
Errr... No... Even at night you would not want to shoot at 2.8 because your Depth of Field would be so shallow that most of your landscape shot would be out of Focus...
it depends on the shot, if most of the landscape is far enough away that it is in focus at infinity then it wouldn't really be an issue (if the lens was sharp corner to corner at f/2.8)
Edit: sorry, just noticed how old your comment is, sorry for comment necromancy
These dudes never experience shooting milky way. 😒 Lmao
im not rich so... looks like I'm getting the Tamron
Pro tip from Norway: If its cold outside zip up one or two of your jackets :)
Nice test
LOL
I don't think I could spend that much money on a lens without IS or VC. As a Video guy it's pretty much a necessity
Got no tripod?
Jj Sands how about in a crowd, or anywhere I don't have time or space to setup?
cheatingthesystem21
This JjSands guy is a jerk and a troll. The fact is, without IS there is no justification in buying this lens. People are not going to buy a lens like this for versatility or general purpose. If that was the case, they would buy the 24-70 F4 L for $999.00. People want a lens like this for the speed. F2.8, to shoot indoors, at night and artistic photography. In which case there are a few different directions you can go without spending as much money. For instance, there are two lenses from Sigma with excellent reviews and are being used by many pros: The Sigma 18-35 1.8 for $799.00 and the 50mm 1.4 art lens for $949.00. You can buy both those lenses and still have money for a case of beer. Of course I'm talking still photography.
***** Have you used this lens or are you talking our of your ass like you always do.
Jj Sands
I see no point carrying on a conversation with a person having an IQ lower than a guppy.
As a long time customer of The Camera Store I really enjoy these videos.
I just sold the 10-year old Canon 24-70 f/2.8 and after serious considerartions ended up with the Tamron which I have been trying now for two days only. The picture quality is very much better than with the old Canon. I can see distortion this way on wide angle and that way on the tele side. Tele, sort of, call it long normal. I see quite remarkable vignetting which surprises me, it is on the long end. Autofocus is accurate, the wide open shots are sharp where you want them to. Then the VC or IS or whatever you want to call it. With the Canon 5DIII the picture quality degrades at high ISO. The extra couple of EVs provided by the stabilizer come in handy here -unless, of course you are shooting moving subjects. This was essentially the reason why I picked the Tamron...the asthma medication I need now makes my hands shake and, well...there is not much else you can do if you want to shoot hand held...
I have the Tamron 24-70mm lens and love it -- no issues whatsoever. No play between the camera and lens with my 24-70mm…it's absolutely tight and solid on my lowly D7000 body. Can't see paying double the price for a lens that doesn't even have VC! The Tamron 70-200mm lens will be my next lens.
I honestly don't think the Canon would be worth the extra money on a crop body. The Tamron is exceptional in the centre 80% of the image. With the Canon you are largely paying for the outstanding edge to edge performance on a full frame.
Jordan @ The Camera Store TV
The Canon worths every penny.@07:56 there is a huge difference!
Erik Wahlstrom If you're going to be printing your images it matters. If it's not sharp, toss it out.
A decent one? Something larger than your computer screen. Something to display on a wall, to be proud of. I understand what your saying but if you missed the focus and could have hit it you missed the picture. Maybe it's just me but I wouldn't be satisfied with an image knowing it could have been better if it was focused. And I would say sharpness is how true the detail of whatever you're capturing is to the actual thing. That tamron image that was pointed out in the original comment is not focused at all. Even if you scaled it back down the IQ of the canon would be much better. In this specific situation
sportagus3 Bought the Canon. Thank you
Yes, but if you weren't worried about price, you might as well drop the dime on the canon. That's just my opinion.
And you can go through the comment feed again to obtain my response to that.
Do both of these lenses make noises when shooting videos?
Like using VC & F stop & focus & zooming during video shots.
Nice clips to share to the world.
This episode was filmed entirely with the Zeiss 24mm F2.
Jordan @ The Camera Store TV
Great video. What I see here is that the Tamron is an excellent zoom lens, while the Canon is an outstanding bagful of prime lenses without the bag.
And the Nikkor Travel Cart you'd need to transport such a lens...
Jordan @ The Camera Store TV
awesome video! when was this video shot? i understand Canada gets cold but down south in Texas we finally dipped below 100 degrees
I'd go with the Canon for the faster autofocus and better edge sharpness at F2.8.
Jordan @ The Camera Store TV
Did you turn the VC off when you where shooting on the tripod?
I bought the Tamron earlier this year & never once regretted it. Which is not to say that the Canon is not superb. I'm just totally happy with my choice. Especially considering the VC & the price. In short, Tamron's a great performer!!
I would like to see how the Canon compares to the Sony Zeiss 24-70 2.8
There are always tests done on full frame vs full frame but, how 'bout full frame vs crop sensore. How much better would the Tamron be in the corners.
Wow, I didn't notice at first that this was the first version of the Tamron, which has been improved in the G2 version.
Oh you guys have also tested the Carl Zeiss 24-70 for Sony also? No? Thought so.
What about the old Canon's 24-70 f2.8 VS this new Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC?
Could you guys do a comparison between the Canon 24-70 f2.8 IS ii and the Sony CZ 24-70 f2.8 SSM? Thanks...
7:55 not sure if 2 len focus at the same point.
Look like the canon focus on the Wall (tack sharp) and Tamron focus on the Car
I just got the tamron. So this probably would be a good lens for concert photography?
when is IS a must have? only for videos? I got the canon 24-70mm F/2.8 ii and I was told no having IS is not a big issue since I can compensate for it, but in what situations is a must have and that I can't do any type of adjustments in aperture or S.S? thanks
Dave rocks! Welcome to our channel.
If the corners clean up at f/4, and no one shoots landscapes at f/2.8, for landscapes at least isn't the corner sharpness not as big a deal?
It's optical image stabilization so it doesn't affect the image quality, although I would turn it off when the camera is on a tripod. Also, as much as I wish Canon would give the 24-70 IS, I doubt it will happen anytime soon.
Great review. I hope that I'll be able to see a showdown between A-mount Carl Zeiss 24-70 and the Canon 24-70 lenses.
The shots that were taken at night I feel like the blurriness just looks like motion blur to me.. ive never seen that much blur with tamron
Hello..someone just corrected that its not vibration control,its "vibration compensation" which of you is telling the right one?
Thanks guys for enduring the cold and bring us your opinions.
One question though. What lens was used to film this? Excellent quality! Thanks
What would be a better choice between the tamron 24-70mm VC or the Canon 24-70mm f/4 IS ?
Can you say if the lens hoods are interchangeable on each other
Quickly becoming my favorite photography channel on RUclips.
is there any way to silence the shutter on the T4i. i take a lot of wildlife photos and the noise is crazy loud. if there is no way to silence it then what camera would you recommend that matches or nearly matches the quality of the t4i. thanks for your time
Thanks guys for the review. I got the original Canon 24 - 70 it's a great lens and love it! We've been through a lot! :-)
How do you think this version of the Canon 24-70 would fare on the upcoming Canon EOS C100 cinema line camera? A good fit for video shooting? Or? Because I'm not so sure that camera offers or can offer OIS. Thanks!
Hi, How well will the Version 1 Canon compare to the Tamron?
Also if you shoot sports, you're probably not going to use a 24-70. You'll be renting a 400 or greater. Or if it's indoor or close outdoor action, at the very least you'll be going for the 70-200 f/2.8, and that's a different lens shootout which I don't believe you've covered yet. Is the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC (newer version) vs the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS on the schedule yet?
Can u do a test a tamron 24-70 VC with Sony 24-70 gmaster? Is there any different?
Why when you test distortion at 24mm , you show only part of the wall or you was close to the wall? while in Tamron test you have bigger amount of bricks.
I love my Canon glass but I have to go with the Tamron. Not because the image quality is better, but because the price of the Tamron is nicer.
Canon is silly they put an IS with a Macro feature on the same as this one but brought the f/2.8 to f/4 which I don't understand why. one reason was lost weight. Also they put the pinch cap on the f.4 but not on the f/2.8.
Mr CameraStoreTV can you do a compare of Canon 24-70mm f.2.8 II USM with Canon 24-70mm f/4 IS USM. canon said the f4 can shoot good fast in low lighting they have new lens technology. is it true? or BS? I need to know to buy which for a budge
man, are you serious ride on the Lada?
Tamron lenses are amazing. I've been using a 17-50 on a Nikon D90 for 4-5 years at least and it is amazing. You could say they are "value" lenses but that makes them sound cheap.
I get pro results and sharpness with the Tamron I'm using everyday. I'll also say Sigma makes amazing stuff. I rented their newest 70-200 recently for a wedding and was blown away by the quality of it.
Hey guys! Nice video!
Did you had the VC on or off when took the auto focus speed challenge? I think, that this will influence the duration of focusing a lot.
My 70-300mm Tamron lens was a suuuper cheap alternative to a Nikon one, but without image stabilization, it's quite tough to take nice pics at 1/100 shutter speed or less, unless you follow the subject perfectly. Also at F4 you get noticeable chromatic aberration. For a fraction of the Nikon lens, and if you play around its limitations, it's great, but you don't get the ease of use of the higher quality lens.
Please do more A-Mount comparisons! Would love to see the Sony 24-70mm f/2.8 CZ comparisons w/ the Nikon and Canon counterparts, also w/ Sigma!
Agreed! Very curious how CZ 24-70 compares to it's competitors!
For video - are both lenses par focal? (focus pt doesn't shift when zooming)
I've had the Tammy 3 different times over a 3 yr period & could never fall in love with it! It shot sharper with the VC off but still didn't love it, bought the Mark II & not only got rid of the Tammy I no longer needed my 35mm prime any more:)
Steve MacDonald the 35 prime is still 2 stops faster. i won't be getting rid of mine. you also can't replicate the look with the 24-70 either. ie background blur.
You guys are the "DigitalRev" of North America! Totally Awesome!
Does anyone know if the 6D has in camera distortion Correction?
I bought the Tamron and found it to be very soft and sold it back on Ebay. The 50 f1.4 I replaced it with is way sharper. Having said that I'd probably buy it again after I pick up a FF camera. The 24-70 on a cropped sensor blows you know what.
The Canon is my go to lens for most of my work. I shoot it through camera blimps and I need a very quick focusing lens and I need sharpness from corner to corner at 2.8. I traded my old Canon 24-70 lens for the newer one and I am very happy. It is a much better lens than the old version. Not happy about the cost but this is the tool of my trade. Canon really needs to put an IS in this lens. Talked to a Canon rep and he said if IS was installed it would reduce the sharpness.
what do you think of sigma 70-20 f/2.8 for nikon?
Hey what about the sigma 24-70MM 2.8 vs the canon 24-70MM
Got the Tamron for my Nikon again price factor. But the VC was a really nice surprise and useful when you need to stretch that stops. Great vid guys.
can you do canon 24-70 vs canon 24-70ii?
is this good for filming for outdoor sports? 24-70mm f4
6:20 mark, you guys messed up the stereo channels: they are inverted
is the tamron way better than the sigmas 24-70mm 2.8 hsm on al f.stops im asking for im gona buy one of them soon
Hey, Which Lens and Camera Are you used to shooting for this video.?
Excellent review.
I was all set to go with the Tamron because the VC would make it a nice walk around lens, where my hand holding capability will be suffering by the end of a long day.
But, watching the video, I'm now leaning towards the 24-70. I'll be keeping my 24-105 for walk around duty.
Edge-sharpness of the Canon might mean I can hold off buying a dedicated landscape prime for a little while longer. The faster AF can also be a big deal.
I should add that I have the original Canon 24-70mm on my 60d, and LOVE it. It is so consistently sharp and fast - sure not thinking about replacing it any time soon.
I have budget issues and in my country the Sigma is a lot cheaper than the Tamron.So should I consider taking Sigma or wait for months then buy the Tamron. And also how good is the Sigma in terms of video?
I just purchased this lens a few days ago. Pretty nice upgrade from the 24-70 I. I dialed it in using Focal and its tack sharp.
so tamron is better than first version of 24-70 f2.8 ?
I'm not getting sharp images with this lens.. not sure whether that piece i have is not compatible.. any suggestions..
+Prakash Yalamarthi check the focus issue either back or front focus
How can I check that.. can you pls guide me...
Tamron has terrible quality control. Reading the forms some people have to buy several copies of the lens before getting an acceptable one. I purchased 3 and gave the fuck up. All terrible back focusing or just missing focus.
Thanks for the reply.. finally I sold out the lens after a lot of struggle.. I can't think of exchange because my friend bought this for me to Singapore from USA. .. no one mentioned such a thin in any of these reviews :(
Exactly, I read several reviews with no mention of it either. Take a look at the reviews on Amazon..there are several people complaining about it. Something fishy going on for sure.
Is this lens, 24-70mm, good for landscape aswell?
Would the VC on the Tamron still work if I used it on a Sony a7s? Thanks!
Yes I put this lens on my FS7 with metabones speed booster.
Minwoo Park Hey Minwoo, are you still happy with Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC coupled with FS7? Any problems?
It's all relative. Any lens (even the best primes) at 24mm are going to have some barrel distortion.
does the Tamron have internal focus?
I agree. With @britestube I am in the process of buying either the Tamron 24-70m VC or the Canon 24-105mm 4.0 IS. Could you guys do a video on that?
I'm confused... Here in South Africa, the Tamron lens is about 15% more expensive than the Canon lens. (R18000 vs R15000 through takealot.com)
how does it compare it against Sigma? I was thinking of getting one of those to save some bucks. Any thought?
how about a review on the tamron 24-70 vs nikon 24-70
Informative as always. Is the canon lens the best 24-70 of any 24-70, including non canon lenses?
Nope, the Sony FS700 just has incredible dynamic range.
Jordan @ The Camera Store TV
i had a question ive been using mark 3 for awhile and loving it .. i wanted to purchase a new lens and am confused between three lenses .. the first one is a carl zeiss 25mm f2 which has no chromatic aberration .. and second being the 16-35mm f2.8 II and third being 24-70 f2.8 II am not sure which is the best choice .. i already own a Zeiss 18mm,50mm and 85mm and a canon 70-300 L so which one would you choose out out of the three please let me know thanks
just got my dinner ready, and here's 10 minutes of really interesting topic to watch. Thanks :)
Im sold on the Canon in every way except the fact that it doesn't have IS. I shoot both video and photography and I feel that spending all of this money on a lens with no IS will hurt me during video production. I have a range of other lenses however so I would be covered on a video shoot for other options, but i'm worried about seeing the negative effects of no IS on a ridiculously expensive lens. Any suggestions/other alternatives?
just jumped from sony to canon and the 7d...need a good wedding lens and I think the tamron is my next purchase thanks for the review
How about Carl Zeiss 24-70mm f/2.8?
hey, i know u've done Sony A7. My question is will the VC work on Tamron 24-70 attached to Sony A7 through LA-EA4 adapter? Can you do a review on this? thx a bunch
It's hard to say. The Canon at 24mm was close to the wall (5.5 bricks across) and the Tamron was further back (10.5 bricks across). They should have mounted them on the same tripod so it would be the exact same image. Only then would we truly see the difference. On a side note, I've heard that this Tamron is at least as good (if not better) than Canon's ver I.
Thanks for the review! If you had to choose between the tamron and 24-105, which one would you take? Both about the same price and have vc/is; one is faster, but the other has more range. How would you rate the IQ in the comparable range; big difference?
Thanks for your thoughts!
can i use tamron for nikon d5300?
I'm mostly a video guy and wanted to know what would be a better buy the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC or the New Canon 24-70mm f/4L IS. Would that extra 200 bucks be worth the money being its an L glass or would that 2.8 on the Tamron be worth getting over the Canon?
6:03, how did you audio get flipped?!?
7:54 tamron image is blur.... u should use another photo for comparison
pleeeease compare the new Tamron 2,8 70-200mm VC with the canon or sigma !