comparable canon len 24mm to 70mm f2.8L
- Thread starter hsieh
- Start date
After you have read the reviews you will know for yourself. Learn to make decisions instead of depending on others to do them for you.
You can try the Tamron 24-70 VC if the Canon 24 70 is too expensive for you.
For the record the Tamron 1 is good and popular. But whether it suits you or not. Nobody can help you. As it is or can be very subjective.
if i were u, i would definitely save up slowly and get the 24-70 f2.8 version ii. i might have to wait, and it might take months, but i know what i get is the best & i would definitely enjoy it the most & without having to constantly think "if only i had saved and waited to get the canon version ii instead..." besides, i guess this is a hobby and not rice bowl for u, so its ok to wait a while... in the meantime, learn more and maximise whatever u have first..
can not afford than just get whatever is within your budget,
if you are a pros, this will be your tool of your trade, you will some how find the money some way some day, don't have to think so hard now, surviving first, expending later.
if this is just a hobby, than why make yourself so miserable? you are suppose to enjoy the hobby, ask yourself if without a pro grade lens, would it make your hobby less enjoyable? w
Why never mention Sigma and Cosina? Cosina makes Zeiss lenses for many brands' mounts.
need not be 24 to 70 --- can be 24 to 105
need not be 2.8
no need for L
Just buy the cheap lens. Why must it be comparable to your reference lens.
It is like asking - please advise what Proton or Perodua one can buy - but it must be comparable to the Ferrari that you actually wanted.
need not be 24 to 70 --- can be 24 to 105
need not be 2.8
no need for L
Just buy the cheap lens. Why must it be comparable to your reference lens.
It is like asking - please advise what Proton or Perodua one can buy - but it must be comparable to the Ferrari that you actually wanted.
Am a fortunate owner of a not as bad as many people say 2470mkI. While its not as sharp as my 70200mkII, it does get the job done and is way cheaper than the 2470mkII.
Of cos having upgraded to the mkII, I now know why people say its worth saving and "eating grass" for.
If that is way out of your budget, I would suggest a 2nd hand 2470mkI but remember to test a few copies and look for UZ code first. Both mine and my friend's one were not as soft as most people say it is. wonder if Canon knowing their mkII will take sometime to release did something to the mkI.
If you don't wanna take the risk or don't have the time to slowly hunt for a good UZ 2470mkI, I would suggest the new Tamron 2470 VC. While its slightly sharper than my old 2470mkI, unless you print or export huge photos, you cant really tell the difference out of Lightroom/Aperture/etc unless again you are the type who uses out of camera jpeg. But some say the VC is another reason why the Tamron makes more sense.
Ultimately just make sure you will enjoy the lens.
Of cos having upgraded to the mkII, I now know why people say its worth saving and "eating grass" for.
If that is way out of your budget, I would suggest a 2nd hand 2470mkI but remember to test a few copies and look for UZ code first. Both mine and my friend's one were not as soft as most people say it is. wonder if Canon knowing their mkII will take sometime to release did something to the mkI.
If you don't wanna take the risk or don't have the time to slowly hunt for a good UZ 2470mkI, I would suggest the new Tamron 2470 VC. While its slightly sharper than my old 2470mkI, unless you print or export huge photos, you cant really tell the difference out of Lightroom/Aperture/etc unless again you are the type who uses out of camera jpeg. But some say the VC is another reason why the Tamron makes more sense.
Ultimately just make sure you will enjoy the lens.
Just one thing to note, the tamron 24-70 is not that cheap as well when compared to the 24-70 mk1. If you really want to save some dough, consider the very much cheaper Tamron 28-75/2.8
Similar threads
