has anyone used the new Tamron 24-70 VC?

[Federico Perale]

I am trying to find out more clips and there's a few on youtube, but not much.
I wonder if the VC mechanism is worth it

I think Canon missed a great opportunity, when they decided to release their new L 24-70 without putting the IS.

Is anyone here already using this lens?

Fed

[Kawika Ohumukini]

thatnikonguy on youtube did several videos comparing the Canon, Nikon, Sigma and Tamron 24-70 lenses.

[Federico Perale]

thanks I saw them, but I was wondering if anyone here had direct experience using this lens

was going to buy the 100 L macro, but I am reconsidering and maybe going for this Tamron, but I have reservations as I already have the 24-105, which I like for stills, a bit less for video (and the IS is very noisy)

[Andrew Alden Miller]

I got one but then sent it back the very next day. It's well built, not too big or heavy even with the 82mm filter thread, and the VC is solid. The problem, for me, was the the zoom and focus rings operate in the opposite direction as Canon lenses. Mixing my lens bag like that forces me to think about pulling focus instead of riding it instinctively. The results are just not worth it.
The 24-105 is not among my favorite lenses, but in the daytime it's peerless for video shooters, IMO. Oh well.

[Craig Terott]

Two thumbs down on Tamron's stabilization. Maybe they've improved upon it recently but the 17-50mm I had lacked the good IS i've come to expect with other brand names. Specifically, they seem to generate a muddy look instead of a controlled stabilization and watchable image. Some 5 year old kids running by my monopod on a dance floor should be absorbed by Tamron's VC right? nope, the image is completely destroyed in a muddy haze. My self-talk after experiencing several other brands/lenses IS was... "Tamron, you call this stabilization - but it ain't legit stabilization."

[Nigel Barker]

Originally Posted by Federico Perale

thanks I saw them, but I was wondering if anyone here had direct experience using this lens

was going to buy the 100 L macro, but I am reconsidering and maybe going for this Tamron, but I have reservations as I already have the 24-105, which I like for stills, a bit less for video (and the IS is very noisy)

I can thoroughly recommend the 100mm F/2.8L IS Macro lens. It's not just a great macro lens but super as a short telephoto too. The IS really helps both stills & video.

I would never buy another Tamron after the horrible 17-50mm EF-S lens that I bought for my 600D(T3i). The focus & zoom rings rotate the wrong (Nikon) way. The IS is noisy & ineffective & you need to slide the switch from AF to M before manually focusing. Sadly you get what you pay for when it comes to 3rd-party lenses & none that I have tried are a patch on a Canon.

[Federico Perale]

hi Nigel
interesting feedback

I didn't even know about the fact that Tamron lenses operate in the opposite way to Canons....what a shame!

still I would be more than happy to stick with Canon glass, if they were kind enough to belt out a 24-70 2.8 stabilized

but Canon doesn't seem to listen a lot to what goes around. they just do their own way (as proved by the 5d mk3, in many ways)

ah well....

[Chad Dyle]

I hated Tamron (past experiences), but decided to give this lens a try. I'm actually pretty impressed with it. I can't speak for photos, but for video, it has really come in handy. Like someone else posted, it does focus backwards from Canon lenses and the focus ring is closer to the camera while the zoom ring is at the end of the lens. I don't find myself zooming while shooting, so it really isn't a problem. Zoom ring was pretty stiff to begin with, but has loosened up after use. The VC is pretty solid. I don't think there is another lens in that range that does VC, but I'm happy. I also use the Canon 100mm Macro IS. I can't say if its as good or not, but for the price and focal length, it works for us.

-Chad

[Bill Grant]

I just purchased this lens as well because of the 2.8 and VC. I own the 24-105 and LOVE IT. This one seems a tad sharper and it seems a bit easier to focus, everything else is about on par, but the 2.8 allows me to shoot at 2500 where on the f/4 I would be at 4000. Very impressed so far.
Bill

[Tony Davies-Patrick]

I second Nigel's comments on the Canon 100mm IS Macro. It has one the best and most advanced image stabiliser units of all the lenses.
The image stabiliser in the latest version Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 OS is also incredible, definitely the best IS I have ever tried and matches the Canon's best IS L lenses in image stability and sharpness.