I've yet to come across someone who is not happy with this lens. I don't think many will try to claim that it surpasses the 24-70 in quality*, but I don't suppose that's what you are asking anyways.
*edit: I seem to remember making a similar statement before and scalvert claiming that it gets very close in quality (but maybe my memory is bad).
This Tamron is a sweet lens, as I'm sure I've posted previous in the numerous other threads comparing these two lenses :o) The lens virtually lives on my camera, and rarely gets switched to any other. The only advantages of the Canon 24-70 that I can see over the Tamron are a slightly more neutral colour cast (the Tamron is a little warm, istr), a more conventional zoom twist direction (reverse twist confuses some ppl), it's a touch wider (24 vs 28), and is weather-sealed. If you think all that is worth the 3x asking price, go for the Canon, otherwise the Tamron is a winner hands down...
The Tamron is a fantastic lens. Here's an example of what it can produce:
The main thing, other than what has been said here so far, is that their QC is a little lacking, and you might need to go through a few before you get one that is spot on sharp. I bought one about 1 year ago, and returned it because it was considerably soft. I gave it another try a few months ago, and got a real gem. Very sharp even at 2.8.
I say go for it. I can't imagine spending the extra $$$.
I dont mean to hijack this thread but im trying to decide between the tamron 28-75 and a sigma 18-200 (or 18-125)
I havent found any full reviews for the sigma 18-200 but I know the 28-75 kicks ass in terms of image quality. But the extra zoom on the sigma is so tempting. Anyone know where i can find a review of the sigma and how good the image quality is on it?
I seem to remember... scalvert claiming that it gets very close in quality [to the Canon 24-70L].
You remember correctly. My last three ribbon winners were taken with that lens. I found a lens review at one point that listed the Canon at 4.2 and the Tamron at 4.1 (or something like that). Given the price difference, I'll take it!
I dont mean to hijack this thread but im trying to decide between the tamron 28-75 and a sigma 18-200 (or 18-125)
I havent found any full reviews for the sigma 18-200 but I know the 28-75 kicks ass in terms of image quality. But the extra zoom on the sigma is so tempting. Anyone know where i can find a review of the sigma and how good the image quality is on it?
You'll lose a lot of image quality by going with such long zoom lenses as the Sigma 18-200mm. No need to read any reviews to know that. Even the $2200 Canon 28-300mm L doesn't have high enough image quality for my taste, let alone a lowly $400 Sigma 18-200mm!!
i just ordered mine on amazon... it looks like its going to be quite a wait, estimated ship date is mid july. I guess i'll just have to manage the kit lens till then.
Probably the best bang for the bucks in the midrange zoom. The Canon 24-70 f2.8L is optically better but only you'll be able to decide if it's $1000 better or not.
It's hard to find....they seem to be out of stock every place I've looked at!
My local shop ordered it in for me and I got it within the week.
Is your local shop a chain or privately owned? It's on backorder through B&H. Hmmm...I think there may be a Ritz in the mall. I'll check that one online. This lens interests me, especially looking at the photos and researching the info online.
Checked local stores in LA area for this lens. Retail at $400. Considering the tax, I would wait for it to come in stock in b&h. After buying this lens, what do you guys do with the kit lens (18-55 one)?
