Canon 24-70 2.8 alternative

[Dmitri]

I need a 24-70 2.8, but can't afford the Canon.

Also, I have the 60D (crop) and remember reading a while back that I could (or should) not even bother with the 24-70 because of the crop sensor, and get another lens instead. I can't remember what it was though.

How are some decent alternatives, like Tamron or Sigma?

 

[ronlane]

Here are the choices from B&H.

SLR Lenses, DSLR Lenses | B&H Photo Video

Or consider KEH.com and go used.

Canon EF, EF-S, EF-M Mount - Page 1 - Purchase - KEH Camera

 

[waday]

can't afford the Canon

What's your budget?

 

[goodguy]

Going for a full frame pro lens makes sense only if in the future you plan on upgrading to full frame from APS-C sensor camera.
Tamron 24-70mm 2.8 VC is an excellent lens, just as good as the Canon equivalent if not even more and you get a very effective image stabilizer as bonus.

 

[ronlane]

Going for a full frame pro lens makes sense only if in the future you plan on upgrading to full frame from APS-C sensor camera.
Tamron 24-70mm 2.8 VC is an excellent lens, just as good as the Canon equivalent if not even more and you get a very effective image stabilizer as bonus.

I disagree. Good glass is good glass no matter what body it is on. I'm not saying that the Tamron isn't an excellent choice as well. But as with most cases, you get what you pay for.

 

[goodguy]

Going for a full frame pro lens makes sense only if in the future you plan on upgrading to full frame from APS-C sensor camera.
Tamron 24-70mm 2.8 VC is an excellent lens, just as good as the Canon equivalent if not even more and you get a very effective image stabilizer as bonus.

I disagree. Good glass is good glass no matter what body it is on. I'm not saying that the Tamron isn't an excellent choice as well. But as with most cases, you get what you pay for.

Well yes and no
FF lens is more expensive and bigger then an equivalent or close to equivalent crop sensor lens so while if talking on pure IQ then optically you are right but a designed APS-C lens will be just as good for such a camera and will be smaller and cheaper.

 

[runnah]

But as with most cases, you get what you pay for.

ehhhh I haven't been impressed with canon glass lately. Granted lots of of it is a few generations behind. For example the 35mm L gets blown away by the Sigma Art 35, same goes for the 50mm. What kills me is that both are significantly cheaper that the L versions. Heck even the non L versions of the 35/50/85 are only slightly not as good as the L's but certainly not enough to justify the price.

So stick with Sigma for some primes, and then Tamron for the zooms. That being said Canon does big primes relly well.

 

[Derrel]

I would wait JUST A WHILE, and buy what is shaping up to be THE hot, new 24-70mm lens: the upcoming Tokina 24-70 f/2.8. Roger Cicala at Lensrentals.com just previewed it...it's scheduled to appear in wide release very soon, and is looking like a VERY good lens. Price? As I recall, in the $999 price category.
This is a modern, sophisticated design, made large for the highest degree of easy precision in lens grinding and assembly. LensRentals.com - Quick MTF of the Tokina 24-70 f/2.8 PRO Fx

15 elements in 11 groups with 3 molded aspheric and 3 ultra-low dispersion glass elements--as in "sophisticated" design AND materials choices. Based on the one lens Roger did the MTF testing on, the Tokina is clearly a better lens than the Tamron 24-70 VC at the wide end and at 70mm, and about equal at 50mm.

 

[runnah]

I would wait JUST A WHILE, and buy what is shaping up to be THE hot, new 24-70mm lens: the upcoming Tokina 24-70 f/2.8. Roger Cicala at Lensrentals.com just previewed it...it's scheduled to appear in wide release very soon, and is looking like a VERY good lens. Price? As I recall, in the $999 price category.
This is a modern, sophisticated design, made large for the highest degree of easy precision in lens grinding and assembly. LensRentals.com - Quick MTF of the Tokina 24-70 f/2.8 PRO Fx

15 elements in 11 groups with 3 molded aspheric and 3 ultra-low dispersion glass elements--as in "sophisticated" design AND materials choices. Based on the one lens Roger did the MTF testing on, the Tokina is clearly a better lens than the Tamron 24-70 VC at the wide end and at 70mm, and about equal at 50mm.

Interesting. Tho personally Tokina has a long way to go to get me to plop down some cash. Maybe this is is what puts them on the map.

Personally I'd don't see the appeal of this range, make a 35-85 2.8 and I'd come running. Make a 24-105 2.8 and i'll come running with my pants around my ankles.

 

[Derrel]

I had a good Tokina ATX Pro 28-70 f/2.6~2.8 some years back....and that lens was actually pretty good....but I also had a 28-80 f/2.8 ATX-Pro that I nicknamed Der Flaremeister...it was simply God-awful when shot toward the light, and I ended up giving it away to an elderly, fixed income fellow in my other photo group...it was a lens I realllly regretted buying--I payed like $600 for it brand new and it was a POS. That was in 2001.

Tokina was founded by a bunch of people who left the Nikon company some years back. I like their more-neutral, Nikon-like color rendering, and dislike that yellow stain look that Sigma has been infamous for for so long. Sigma's fine on Canon though...I think it's actually tuned to look more like Canon glass than Nikon's cooler color rendering.

I dunno...I've been watching the Ken Rockwell reviews of the various Tokina ultra-wide zooms--they seem to be hitting some home run type balls, at least in batting practice. In general, I think all three third party lensmakers have upped their game; they've left the JV level behind, moving up to varsity level these days. Sigma's ART series for example is so,so much better than the rubbish they were once famous for. Tamron got serious with their newer VC line, after the 17-50 VC debacle...that one was an utter junker.

 

[Ido]

Well, do you need the 24-70mm range on your camera, or that range on a 35mm "full frame" camera? For some, 24-70mm on APS-C can be very useful — those who rarely shoot wide-angle — but I don't see it as a very useful range. I'd much rather have a lens that covers focal lengths ranging from around 16mm to 50mm or higher, and there are some excellent options in that range: Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 or Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 if you need the aperture, or Canon 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 if you need the range. All three are very good optically for zooms.

Generally, smaller sensors will have higher pixel density than bigger sensors, and that's the case with all current and fairly recent Canon APS-C cameras in comparison to any of their full frame cameras, other than the new 5DS / 5DS R which have the same pixel density as the 20MP APS-C sensors (70D & 7D Mark II). Because of that, full frame lenses that seem sharp at 100% view when mounted to the full frame cameras may not be as sharp when used on the APS-C cameras. This is just a theoretical generalization, but it can be seen in practice. For example, I'll compare two lenses that were meant to be very similar, but one made for FF and the other for APS-C: these are the Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM and Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM. In the DxO measurements, we can see this:

Screenshot from this page at Measurements –> Sharpness –> Profiles.
I compared the two lenses on the 6D and 7D Mark II, both have 20MP sensors.
It's clear that the EF 40mm gives worse sharpness than the EF-S 24mm on the 7D Mark II in the center, and narrows that gap towards the edges of the frame and then it's better at the edges. That's because its weaker parts, the edges/corners, are not captured with the APS-C sensor, but the sensor also pushes it to the limits in the center of the frame.
Are you going to notice it? That depends on the lens in question. If it's an excellent lens that's good from edge to edge on the 5DS R, then the "problem" won't even exist.

 

[runnah]

I think all three third party lensmakers have upped their game; they've left the JV level behind, moving up to varsity level these days. Sigma's ART series for example is so,so much better than the rubbish they were once famous for. Tamron got serious with their newer VC line, after the 17-50 VC debacle...that one was an utter junker.

Its quite surprising really. A friend of mine paid top dollar for the canon 50mm L and recently he tried the much cheaper ART 50mm and he was blown away with how much sharper the sigma was.

 

[wyogirl]

I'm just going to say that my Tamron 28-75 2.8 is a fantastic lens... in my opinion at least. I know its not a 24-70 but its a great lens and can be had for around $300 used.

 

[beagle100]

I've been watching the Ken Rockwell reviews of the various Tokina ultra-wide zooms--.

first rule is to never follow Ken Rockwell's advice !

 

[Derrel]

I've been watching the Ken Rockwell reviews of the various Tokina ultra-wide zooms--.

first rule is to never follow Ken Rockwell's advice !

Yeah...he has the opportunity to buy, and shoot, and test, and compare almost every major camera, and every major lens release that hobbyists and serious amateurs are dying to own, so he has far too much experience with the products, and sometimes he says things that make the camera and lens manufacturers pissed off at him. In a word, he buys too many lenses and compares too many lenses with one another, and it's a dangerous site; his site has wayyyy too many family photos and not enough pictures of cats. All this makes his lens-buying advice highly suspect.