Decisions.... help

ronlane · Oct 27, 2015

I've been over analyzing this for over a month now, so I thought I would get some other opinions on it.

I currently have the 28-135mm kit lens. The problems are that it is not fixed aperture and I do not feel that I get good sharp images from it.

As most of you know I shoot sports, landscape and some portraits as well as street stuff.

I have been playing around with the idea of getting a 24-70mm f/2.8 but can't decide if I would be happy with the Tamron version of this lens based on my shooting.

What are your thoughts and/or experiences with this Tamron lens? Please tell me what you shoot with it.

Thanks.

DB_Cro · Oct 27, 2015

You don't need a wider lens then 24 on your 7D?

Anyways, the 24-70 canon is amazing, virtually flawless, but I wouldn't use on a crop sensor body, it's just not wide
enough for me, not even remotely, but if you don't need a wider lens, go for it, it would be amazing when and if you
upgrade to full frame.

I'd rather spend less money on the 17-55 2.8 canon and get the best general purpose/standard zoom for the crop
body that exists for your camera. I got no idea how good the Tamron 24-70 is, but I'm not as happy as I thought
I would be with my 17-50 2.8 tamron.

sm4him · Oct 27, 2015

Yes! DO IT!
:biglaugh:

I'm really just saying that because it's YOUR money, not mine.

Since I don't shoot Canon, I can't help much, but I do have ONE suggestion. Check and see what this lens is selling for used. Take 20% of off that (to adjust for the fact that the price could fall off if another lens is introduced), and then do some math to see what you might really "lose" by buying it.

So, say you buy the lens new for $1200 (NO idea what they actually cost!). Used, it's going for between $750-950, so average of $850. Take 20% off that, leaving $680. So, if you bought the lens today for $1200, and sold it a year from now for $700, would you be happy? You'd have "lost" $500 on the deal--but on the other hand, how much would you have to pay to have rented the lens for that period of time?

Of course, you may be buying used anyway--in which case, heck, as long as you can get about 75-80% of what you paid for it back, then you're golden. Use it and if you decide you want the Canon instead, sell it for what will amount to a very cheap rental price for the period you had it. Who knows, you might even MAKE a few dollars on the deal.

Granted, the other possibility is that you drop it two days after you get it, before you get it on your insurance. THAT would s*ck. But hey, stuff like that NEVER happens. Right?

astroNikon · Oct 27, 2015

you have two cameras
one with the 70-200/4
the other with the 24-70/2.8

can't get much better than that for sports.

DB_Cro · Oct 27, 2015

astroNikon said:
you have two cameras
one with the 70-200/4
the other with the 24-70/2.8

can't get much better than that for sports.

If he had a full frame body, 24-70 and 70-200 would have him covered for everything, but on a crop body.. the 24 is almost 40mm.
I guess you're right about sports shooting but..

ronlane · Oct 27, 2015

DB_Cro said:
You don't need a wider lens then 24 on your 7D?

Anyways, the 24-70 canon is amazing, virtually flawless, but I wouldn't use on a crop sensor body, it's just not wide
enough for me, not even remotely, but if you don't need a wider lens, go for it, it would be amazing when and if you
upgrade to full frame.

I'd rather spend less money on the 17-55 2.8 canon and get the best general purpose/standard zoom for the crop
body that exists for your camera. I got no idea how good the Tamron 24-70 is, but I'm not as happy as I thought
I would be with my 17-50 2.8 tamron.

I have a Sigma 15-30 for an ultra wide angle, so I will be fine with wide angle even on my crop sensors. All the lenses that I have are and will continue to look at are for FF bodies. No sense in buying crop sensor only glass, IMHO.

ronlane · Oct 27, 2015

astroNikon said:
you have two cameras
one with the 70-200/4
the other with the 24-70/2.8

can't get much better than that for sports.

Well upgrade the f/4 to a 2.8 and then add a body and a 300 or 400 f/2.8. It get better, lol. (but you knew that.)

runnah · Oct 27, 2015

Get a 400mm f/5.6 L. Roughly the same price of the Tamron and its great for (daytime) sports and birds.

Or save up for a 300 2.8

runnah · Oct 27, 2015

Side note, I can't get on board with the 24-70. I always find it not wide enough or not tight enough. But this is on a FF so YMMV.

astroNikon · Oct 27, 2015

I went FF for sports a while ago and love it. Since this was for "fun" and my kids and other families I didn't want to venture out with 2 bodies, as I had my d7000 also. So I stuck to my 80-200/2.8 on a d600 for everything - the 80 was too long on my d7000 alone. But there were times I could have used my 24-85 (36-105ish) on my crop for up close stuff. But I just took a couple steps back instead

I tried my 300/4 once on my crop, but considering I was shooting for fun carrying 2 cameras was awkward and I ditched the idea quickly.
I've used my 150-600 on large fields w/monopod and it's okay though too cramped up close.
You can't win. If the kids would stop growing they wouldn't play on larger and larger fields !!

You'll love it when you get a 5dm<something> in the future and wonder why you didn't do that sooner.

Derrel · Oct 27, 2015

LensRentals.com - Rent a Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC for Canon
Sounds good, right?

LensRentals.com - 24-70mm f/2.8 Lens Teardown Comparison
Not bad!

LensRentals.com - Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Issue
Now THIS...this is alarming: the second element in the lens, which is a large element, held in place by GLUE, and not by clips or rings? What the heck? An element that can just fall out of position? I am wondering if this design shortcut was corrected, or if they just figure, "We'll fix em if they break?" I honestly do not know the answer to this question, but there are user comments on their page that state that this has happened to their lenses. The most recent complaint is from early 2015.

runnah · Oct 27, 2015

Derrel said:
LensRentals.com - Rent a Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC for Canon
Sounds good, right?

LensRentals.com - 24-70mm f/2.8 Lens Teardown Comparison
Not bad!

LensRentals.com - Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Issue
Now THIS...this is alarming: the second element in the lens, which is a large element, held in place by GLUE, and not by clips or rings? What the heck? An element that can just fall out of position? I am wondering if this design shortcut was corrected, or if they just figure, "We'll fix em if they break?" I honestly do not know the answer to this question, but there are user comments on their page that state that this has happened to their lenses. The most recent complaint is from early 2015.

ahem

"Addendum: I spoke with Tamron, USA who assures me they haven't seen this problem at all before now. That would seem to indicate that our habit of shipping things all over the country is certainly contributing to the problem.

I was very impressed with their response. Rather than just telling me "there is no problem", they've taken the report very seriously and sent this lens back to Japan for further analysis to make certain there isn't a problem with the glue used or the way it was applied in this copy. I certainly wish more manufacturers would adopt this "let's see if we can find an problem" attitude. As an aside, I mentioned I was impressed with how rapidly their repair department got to this lens and was told very clearly that they get to every repair within 3 days. Now that is impressive!!!"

JacaRanda · Oct 27, 2015

I also can vouch for their customer service in regards to turnaround time. Both times for firmware updates - very satisfied.

wyogirl · Oct 27, 2015

I have the Tamron 28-75 2.8 and it is hands down my favorite lens. Its almost always on the camera. I do have a wide angle for real estate, but the Tammy is my favorite lens by far.

Derrel · Oct 27, 2015

The addendum was Tamron's denial that they have ever seen the issue. And yet...in late 2014 and early 2015, regular users are writing to an obscure blog, after their lenses suffered from the same issue, three years after it was first brought up....

Hmmm...

According to what is on their page, that second lens element is held in position with three spots of glue. Now that is great design. There are also "regular people" who wrote in, complaining that their own, personal lenses had suffered this defect, people from all over the world.

I think the chances of this happening might be very high if the lens is dropped or suffers a knock. This design issue would make me really reconsider this lens for a critical duty type lens. I mean come on,...the second element is f**** glued into position and has absolutely NO retaining mechanism at all?

Glue is something that breaks down over time,most typically.

Lensrentals.com rents lenses out, and ships them in heavily padded containers. Their experience gives a pretty good idea of the types of failures that various lens designs suffer from. Consider it a proving ground that weeds out inferior designs.

Quick turn around on a lens that requires a quick front retaining ring removal, then a re-gluing of the second element into position...yeah...that is impressive as hell...almost as impressive as a zoom lens made in 1981 that's never been in the shop and has been beat to ****. Or as impressive as a 1973 macro lens with half the paint worn off and no trips ever to a repair center.