Which L zoom brought you great joy?

[An drew]

I would, but dunno when it will launch..

This lens is out, should be able to find it.

Now for the 200-400:

Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L Lens Hands-On Report: “This Thing is $%^#ing Amazing”

[avsquare]

This lens is out, should be able to find it.

Now for the 200-400:

Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L Lens Hands-On Report: “This Thing is $%^#ing Amazing”

You mean the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 is out in our local stores? When?

[esoeij]

You mean the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 is out in our local stores? When?

A month or so? Street price ard $1688 I think.

[avsquare]

A month or so? Street price ard $1688 I think.

cool, that's about the 2nd hand price of the 24-70L now

[An drew]

A month or so? Street price ard $1688 I think.

Thanks, Hong Kong price is ard $1400.

[esoeij]

Yar that's why even if I buy it I will wait for my next HKG trip.

[An drew]

Yar that's why even if I buy it I will wait for my next HKG trip.

heheh, $1370 to be more precise, based on current exchange rate. And the price should fall further once it is more widely available.

[jasonteoch]

It would be great if the price is really less then $1.4k

[avsquare]

Going to check out the Funan shops and ask their price..

It's quite interesting based on this ISO12233 crops:

Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens Image Quality

Based on f/2.8 (Tamron's VS 24-70L (Mark I):
24mm shows that the Tamron is SUPER sharp and wins Canon's - but Canon's better at mid-frame and corner

35mm shows that Tamron's still very sharp at center and beats Canon's, but Canon's still better at mid-frame and especially corners

50mm is very interesting - center and mid-frame is almost identical; I would say center is a draw while for mid-frame, Tamron has a very slight edge over Canon's, and for corners, Canon's had a slight edge over Tamron's

70mm would probably be Tamron's weak point - results is very similar to 50mm whereby the center and mid-frame is a close call, personally for mid-frame I find Tamron's having a very slight edge. However, the corners for Tamron seemed bad. Looks soft compared to Canon's and showing some amount of CA over here.


Personally, I think if anyone doesn't need the weather seal of Canon's nor the extreme expected performance of the 24-70L II, or doesn't wish to spend SGD$3K for the 24-70L II, The Tamron seems to be a damn good choice.

[An drew]

The Tamron seems to be a damn good choice.

The Tamron compares quite well. I think for such a zoom like this you should not demand ultra-sharpness, otherwise you would be better off with a prime. Once it is sharp enough it can do the job fine. The VC should also help as most of the blur I've gotten from my 24-70 is due to handshake as I rush to get the next shot.

[avsquare]

The Tamron compares quite well. I think for such a zoom like this you should not demand ultra-sharpness, otherwise you would be better off with a prime. Once it is sharp enough it can do the job fine. The VC should also help as most of the blur I've gotten from my 24-70 is due to handshake as I rush to get the next shot.

Yup, in agreement. The very good center and mid-frame performance, at such a price point with VC is already damn good. Now I'm tempted to give up my 24-105L for this one as my general purpose lens

[An drew]

Now I'm tempted to give up my 24-105L for this one as my general purpose lens

I would keep my 24-105 for now because it is 155g lighter than Tamron 24-70. I find 24-70 2.8s generally to be really heavy to lug around the whole day. The slightly longer range can also be useful.

[avsquare]

I would keep my 24-105 for now because it is 155g lighter than Tamron 24-70. I find 24-70 2.8s generally to be really heavy to lug around the whole day. The slightly longer range can also be useful.

I'll still consider abit.. the extra 35mm is very useful, but I do miss the f/2.8 at night. I may be tempted to sacrifice the 35mm for the f/2.8 plus VC and the better performance compared to 24-105L

[An drew]

I'll still consider abit.. the extra 35mm is very useful, but I do miss the f/2.8 at night. I may be tempted to sacrifice the 35mm for the f/2.8 plus VC and the better performance compared to 24-105L

You should go for it and let us know how you feel about this lens.

[avsquare]

You should go for it and let us know how you feel about this lens.

if there' stock and price is reasonable..

[Mustank]

Going to check out the Funan shops and ask their price..

It's quite interesting based on this ISO12233 crops:

Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens Image Quality

Based on f/2.8 (Tamron's VS 24-70L (Mark I):
24mm shows that the Tamron is SUPER sharp and wins Canon's - but Canon's better at mid-frame and corner

35mm shows that Tamron's still very sharp at center and beats Canon's, but Canon's still better at mid-frame and especially corners

50mm is very interesting - center and mid-frame is almost identical; I would say center is a draw while for mid-frame, Tamron has a very slight edge over Canon's, and for corners, Canon's had a slight edge over Tamron's

70mm would probably be Tamron's weak point - results is very similar to 50mm whereby the center and mid-frame is a close call, personally for mid-frame I find Tamron's having a very slight edge. However, the corners for Tamron seemed bad. Looks soft compared to Canon's and showing some amount of CA over here.


Personally, I think if anyone doesn't need the weather seal of Canon's nor the extreme expected performance of the 24-70L II, or doesn't wish to spend SGD$3K for the 24-70L II, The Tamron seems to be a damn good choice.

how about the auto focus speed compared to the canon's usm

[avsquare]

Buy me one and I'll tell you

[Mustank]

I bought a sigma 20mm f1.8 as my first lens. At first,, totally wowed by the f1.8 but I soon realized the motor speed is bad. Then I got a 17-55. Damm shouldn't have wasted marnie in that stupid sigma. Going for 5d3 once nikon resolve their d800 supply issues. Worst come to worst, I get the 16-35 ii. 2nd hand going for 1500$. Usm is an absolute must for me

[An drew]

I bought a sigma 20mm f1.8 as my first lens. At first,, totally wowed by the f1.8 but I soon realized the motor speed is bad. Then I got a 17-55. Damm shouldn't have wasted marnie in that stupid sigma. Going for 5d3 once nikon resolve their d800 supply issues. Worst come to worst, I get the 16-35 ii. 2nd hand going for 1500$. Usm is an absolute must for me

Thanks for your interesting sharing. Some part I dun catch, eg D800.

[nitewalk]

I would keep my 24-105 for now because it is 155g lighter than Tamron 24-70. I find 24-70 2.8s generally to be really heavy to lug around the whole day. The slightly longer range can also be useful.

That's why I ended up buying tamron 28-75. But it does feel like kit lens.

24-105 was another I considered but decided I needed f2.8