Comparison: Canon 24-70 f/2.8 & Tamron 28-75 XR Di F2.8

[Drea]

O.k. I did a search on this and didn't find any specific threads that covered this in particular topic(I'm sure if there is one it will be pointed out~ I'm new go easy)

Trying to decide on a purchase :
I have been going back and forth on this and thought I had ultimately decided on the Canon for quality (sharpness). Although I keep reading about how great Tamaron lenes are now, especially the 28-75. Is it just a matter of "getting a good copy". That extra 5mm sounds enticing as is the price, weight etc compared to the 24-70. Although, I am willing to pay more if the Tamaron is lacking in sharpness @2.8. I have limited resources for actually walking in a store and purchasing or renting, so internet purchase is a must. Is it easy to return a lens if you think it is "soft copy" and get a knew one, how can you tell if it good? I have not made purchases over the internet before and it makes me a little nervous, especially because shipping can be quite a concern where I am. Many companies don't even ship to Guam. Oh BTW I have a measly 300D.

Any advice:scratch
Drea

[cmason]

The Tamron gets high marks most everywhere. It is said to be as sharp as the L lens, though the build quailty is no where near the L. Of course, neither is the price.

http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/lenstests

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-28-75mm-F-2.8-XR-Di-Lens-Review.aspx

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tamron_2875_28/index.htm

[geibphot]

We've got both and as far as sharpness goes I've found them to be near identical. I personally find the 24-70 L produces slightly better color saturation, but the difference is very small...

The four deciding factors I would say are:

Price - Tamron is a fracton of the L...
Weight - Tamron again is a fraction of the L...
Build Quality - Canon is built like a tank, Tamron not so much...
"L Fever" - Ya either got it or you don't...

We shoot weddings and I use the L and my wife uses the Tamron. Even if the price was the same, she perfers the Tamron due to the weight. I think the L feels more balanced on 1.6 sized cameras if they have the battery grip added, else its pretty front heavy... Something to think about.

Best of luck!

Thanks,
Jeremy

[mercphoto]

I bought the Canon over the Tamron primarily for build quality (used a lot at dusty motocross tracks) and for its very, very fast autofocus motor. If you don't need weather sealing, or a lens built like a tank, or a lens that focuses extremely fast, I'm not sure why you'd want the Canon over the Tamron.

[Steve Cavigliano]

Drea,
Here's a comparison I found over at DP Review.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=17516517

FWIW, I love my Tamron and it is my indoor/flash lens of choice. As mentioned, it isn't built all that well (not poorly either), but it is light and the AF is fairly fast except in lighting extremes.

Steve

[Khaos]

I've owned both.

I got rid of the Tamron in favor of the Canon due to the focus hunting the Tamron would encounter sometimes in low light. I'll accept that with a macro lens not with a highly used lens indoors.

If weight is an issue, don't buy the Canon. Personally it doesn't bother me, but there is a big difference. With the hood the lens is somewhat of a beast.

Why the canon is better for me compared to the Tamron:

1. It focuses faster
2. It works better in low light.
3. It has better color saturation.
4. It's quieter.
5. It's an L and is built to take a beating and it holds its value.

If the above aren't worth the extra cost to you, buy the Tamron.

[Drea]

Thanks everyone for your input. I think I am going to go with the Tamron for now, use it to learn more. Hopefully the focus hunting problem won't be an issue; I see that as the only thing that may cause me to upgrade. I'll be purchasing it next month, I'll have to post pics once I get.

Thank you again, I have been lurking for months and finally decided to register hopefully I'll post some pics soon also.


Drea

[PeterGar]

Good choice. I have the Tamron and am very pleased. I've rented the Canon, and yes, like everyone says, the build quality on the Canon is better. The Tamron is lighter in weight and feels more plastic than the Canon. But for the price, you can't go wrong with the Tamron. I got a good copy from the begining.

Picture quality is great. Sharpness is nearly identical to the Canon. Yes, focus-hunting does get frustrating at times, but again, usually in low-light situations. But for the price, the focus-hunting is not enough of a problem for us budget-minded photographers to spend the kind of money for the Canon.

I wouldn't trade my Tamron for anything, well, anything except the Canon 24-70 L. But since nobody is offering me that trade, I'll stick with my Tamron.

:D

[Liza]

I've never used the Canon lens, but do own the Tamron. For $350, it's probably one of the best f/2.8 midrange zooms you can get. The image quality is on par with L lenses. I did a lot of close up work photographing butterflies with it last summer and couldn't be more pleased with its performance.