Tamron vs. Canon 24-70mm f/2.8

[Jdellabella]

Hey all, I'm about to purchase a Canon 6D and some lenses for a few weddings I have this summer. I'm wondering about the Tamron vs. Canon 24-70mm f/2.8. The Canon lens is about $1000 more expensive. Is it worth it to splurge on the Canon, or have you found the Tamron works just fine with wedding and portraiture work?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Braineack]

The Tamron, IMHO, is nothing to scoff at. On paper it's very close to Canon. It acutally has better transmission, distortion, vingetting, and aberrations than the Canon, but the Tamron is softer at 2.8 at 70mm.

The Tamron shines when slower shutter speeds are used, since it actually has VC, which works great compared to a non-IS lens.

 

[hombredelmar]

Hey all, I'm about to purchase a Canon 6D and some lenses for a few weddings I have this summer. I'm wondering about the Tamron vs. Canon 24-70mm f/2.8. The Canon lens is about $1000 more expensive. Is it worth it to splurge on the Canon, or have you found the Tamron works just fine with wedding and portraiture work?

Thanks in advance.

Hey, if you are planning to shoot with Canon it makes sense to invest in Canon glass, in a long run lenses are investments, cameras are not. Also, 24-70 2.8 is one of the most used lenses, you cannot go wrong with it, but of cause it is more expensive, the decisions that you have to make for yourself.

 

[Lumens]

Bottom line I feel it depends on the purpose you have for it. If it is to make you money as a business asset then the Canon is likely the best equipment for what you need. But if this is a hobby or personal request $1000 is a big investment, the Tamron is a better value.

I keep looking at both the 24-70 and the 70-200 f2.8 IS, I want the Canon, but at $2000 difference, well......

 

[TinySquid]

The Tamron SP 70-200 f/2.8 Di VC USD is an excellent lens that most certainly can go toe to toe with Canon's 70-200 f/2.8 L. My biggest criticism of the Tamron, however, is how short the manual focus throw is lock to lock (it makes manually focusing while using extension tubes for macro work very touchy), but that's not something that would be an issue for wedding or portrait work.

My advice would be to try both lenses out if you can (local photography organizations are a good resource) and go with the one you prefer. That said, you could always get the Tamron and then put that $1k in savings toward a fisheye lens, which would allow you to provide wedding clients with something different and creative... and that'll sell a lot more prints than any minuscule IQ difference between the Tamron 70-200 and Canon 70-200*. There are, of course, warranty and service differences between Canon and Tamron to consider as well as a few other things but only you can decide how much weight those details carry in your decision making process.

I bought the Tamron.

*I am not a wedding photographer, so grain of salt and all that... I just do portraits and products.