Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L USM vs. Tamron 28-75 f/2.8

Tamron 70-180mm F/2.8 Di III VXD

03/05/2006 06:50:35 PM · #1

I'm looking to buy a good walk around lens. I thought I wanted the Canon 24-70 f/2.8L USM until I saw the price. Now I am thinking about the Tamron. I have two questions. The first is what is USM? I know it's probably a dumb question but I honestly don't know the answer. My second question is just how much better is the Canon lens. Considering the more than $700 price disparity I would hope it is significantly better. Does anyone have a suggestion as to which one to go with? Is the additional $700 worth it?

MadMan2k

Sony Alpha a6400

03/05/2006 07:06:17 PM · #2

USM is Canon's Ultrasonic Motor focusing system. From what I can gather, it focuses faster and more smoothly, and it lets you override the focus manually even if it's on AF mode (but that might only be on the telephotos).

The Canon is better contructed, heavier, bigger, has the Canon name and the red L-series stripe, and may or may not have better image quality.

The Tamron is an excellent third-party lens, as you can see by the number of users on this site that own it:
//dpchallenge.com/lens.php?LENS_ID=792

It's Tamron's professional series, so it's not a cheaply built lens. The focusing is nice, a lot better than the Canon non-USM lenses I've used. The image quality is excellent.

I would say it's definitely not worth the extra $700. If you have that much money, get the Tamron and spend the remaining $700 on the Canon 10-22mm for an ultrawide. Or, spend it on a real telephoto lens. It looks like you have a 28-200, which is not very fast, and probably lacking in image quality. You could get the Canon 70-200mm F/4 for about $600 and still have money to spare.

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II

03/05/2006 07:09:28 PM · #3

Originally posted by MadMan2k:

IIt looks like you have a 28-200, which is not very fast, and probably lacking in image quality.

You are so right about the poor image quality and speed.

Thanks for the response. I thought that was what people would say, but I wanted to check.

Chiqui

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

03/05/2006 07:16:20 PM · #4

For a "walk-around" lens, I'd get the Tamron. Have you ever seen a Canon 24-70? They are huge and heavy. It'd probably tire me out quickly, but then again, I am small.

June

Ecce_Signum

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

03/05/2006 07:27:53 PM · #5

I can't comment on the Tamron but can say the Canon 24-70 is a stonking good lens! Yes, its big, bulky, heavy, (very) expensive and has a big hood but it does produce excellent reults (got me my only ribbon).

abroken1

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

03/05/2006 07:30:37 PM · #6

I have the Tamron 28-75mm and love it. Unless I was going to be working in the rain, the L-series lenses have a waterproof seal with the 1D cameras (but then I'd have to get a 1D body as well), I don't have any reason to get rid of it.

Another suggestion for the "real" telephoto, is the Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 lens. I've owned this lens and the Canon 70-200 f/4 and they are both outstanding! My experience was the Canon was sharper, but the Sigma can bring in twice the light.

Message edited by author 2006-03-05 19:31:18.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

03/05/2006 09:20:46 PM · #7

Thank you to everyone who responded. I am going to go with the Tamron. I don't need the Canon and I honestly can't justify spending that much money at this point. Thanks again!

Charles

TroyMosley

Canon EOS-5D

03/05/2006 09:41:46 PM · #8

well, IMO, i feel it goes back to the same question about clear filters,
why would you put a 300 hundred dollar of glass on a 1500 dollar camera,
and if you think the size and weight is a problem, lift weights?

jsolsona

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/05/2006 09:52:17 PM · #9

you should also look into the Tamron 24-135 it has amazing reviews..
A bit slow to focus though

03/05/2006 09:54:22 PM · #10

Originally posted by jsolsona:

A bit slow to focus though

yeah, that just won't cut it. i really want something that is extremely fast

ButterflySis

Canon EOS-50D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

03/05/2006 09:58:00 PM · #11

I just got my Tamron yesterday. Here are some test shots from it that I posted on this thread.

They are straight out of the camera - no color corrections, no sharpening.

Original image:

Full crop:

Original image:

Full crop:

Resized Original

100% Crop

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/05/2006 10:03:01 PM · #12

Originally posted by ButterflySis:

I just got my Tamron yesterday. Here are some test shots from it that I posted on this thread.

They are straight out of the camera - no color corrections, no sharpening.

Original image:

Full crop:

Original image:

Full crop:

Resized Original

100% Crop

very impressive..

And with response to Troy Moseley..
I understand what your saying about putting the best glass on the best cameras but I don't feel I can justify the extra $700 when I think I will be able to take just as good shots with the Tamron. One day when I have more money I'll get the Canon :)

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

03/05/2006 11:01:53 PM · #13

You won't regret the Tamron purchase. It can certainly hold its own against the Canon in terms of image quality. The Canon will focus a little faster, but you would only notice it in low light (and your 20D will compensate somewhat). The Canon is silent, but the Tamron is pretty quiet. Since your camera isn't sealed, a sealed lens won't matter much and build quality shouldn't be an issue since the Tamron has a longer warranty. You could buy two of them, keep one in the closet and still save hundreds over the Canon.

I'm obviously a big fan of this lens. The only issue I have with it is that the focusing ring is reversed compared to other Canon lenses, so I'll sometimes zoom in when I meant to zoom out. I have the Tamron on my camera 80% of the time, and I suspect you will, too. ;-)

ButterflySis

Canon EOS-50D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

03/05/2006 11:35:53 PM · #14

Btw, this Tamron currently has a $30 rebate.

yido

Canon EOS-5D

Sigma 20mm f/1.8 EX Aspherical DG DF RF for Canon

03/06/2006 01:42:02 AM · #15

seeing as you have a kit and a 28-300, whn not consider getting an ultrawide instead. For me a really wide is more of a walkaround lens than a 28-75. It's just not wide enough on a cropped sensor and you already have two lenses that fill that spot anyway.

Tamron 70-180mm F/2.8 Di III VXD

03/06/2006 01:42:23 PM · #16

Originally posted by yido:

i really want a fast walkaround that is good in low light. the kit lens is terrible, and the tamron i have no is very old and not very good either. my dad bought it for his old film Rebel about 10 years ago.

MadMan2k

Sony Alpha a6400

03/06/2006 01:50:25 PM · #17

I see you have the 50mm 1.8 - are you pleased with that for low light conditions?

Just letting you know, either of the 2.8 zooms will not be nearly as good as the 50 for low light. The Tamron is a superb lens for daytime, and reasonably well-lit indoors, and it's about perfect for long exposures, but 2.8 isn't really as fast as I expected. I might end up getting a 1.4 prime, since even the 50 1.8 could be a little faster.

Mr_Pants

SiPix Blink

03/06/2006 01:52:35 PM · #18

Originally posted by cfischl:

Originally posted by jsolsona:

A bit slow to focus though

yeah, that just won't cut it. i really want something that is extremely fast

Please note that the Tamron is a lot slower to focus than the Canon. Faster than some, though.