Canon 24-105 f4 vs Tamron 24-70 f2.8

[Ben Davies]

Hi, this lenses are pretty much the same price and both have image stabalisation. I'm just wondering what you'd go for, for shooting mainly weddings and documentary work?

2.8 would be nice, but at the same time I think having the extra range on the Canon would also be handy.

Any tips guys?

Thanks

[Joel Peregrine]

Hi Ben,

It depends on which camera you'll use. I had the 24-105 f4 IS and sold it because it was too slow for candid work - too much grain with the T3i/T2i. I switched to the Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS. Great lens. I also carry the 70-200/2.8 IS for preps so range isn't a problem. When I started shooting with a 5D III I got the Tamron 24-70 with VC. Nice lens though the focus is reversed, like NIkon lenses, which is awkward. Now that I realize that the 5D III can handle high ISO's and show less grain I'd consider shooting with the Canon 24-105/4 IS again.

[Mark Von Lanken]

I do not have any experience with the Tamron, but I do own a couple of the Canon 24-105 f4 lenses. I love the 24-105 and use it quite a bit during the wedding day. I wouldn't want to shoot with an f4 lens with the 60D or t3i, but if you shoot with the Mk3 or 6D, you can get by with f4 in most wedding scenarios and the added reach is really nice with the full frame cameras.

If you were to stay with crop cameras for weddings, I would probably go with the Tamron because you will need the 2.8 and the shorter 70mm will not be as much of an issue.

Additionally, at least in the USA, you can get really good deals on the Canon 24-105 when purchasing it with the 6D. Currently, B&H shows the 24-105 costing about $600 when buying it as the kit lens with the 6D.

[Mark Von Lanken]

Originally Posted by Joel Peregrine

... When I started shooting with a 5D III I got the Tamron 24-70 with VC...

How ironic that neither of us have been posting very much here lately and then we both answer the same question in about the same way. You beat me to the punch and I didn't even know it until I looked back at the post a couple of hours later. :-)

I'm glad you got the Mk3, especially since you are coming down to Oklahoma in about a week. Look for an email about gear for your Okie wedding.

[Ben Davies]

Thanks for your replies guys, I'm getting either the 6D or the 5Dmk3 so will be getting the Canon.

[Peter Rush]

Interested to know if you guys try slowing down footage from your 5DIII - I used one as my main camera for a few weddings at the end of last season as I was about to overhaul my kit (Trusty Sony Z1/FX1) as I like the large sensor look. I found however that fast moves tended to stutter (filming at 1080/25p) and slowing motion down resulted in the same (I investigated twixtor which sort of worked but seriously hampered my work flow as rendering times were slow)

I instead invested instead in a Sony EA50 (APS-C sensor) which gives me a nice look, I can shoot 50p which gives me smooth slow motion, plus i can use my expensive Canon glass with it.

I still have the 5dIII sat on the shelf - shame no 50p though :/

Pete

[Nigel Barker]

Originally Posted by Peter Rush

I still have the 5dIII sat on the shelf - shame no 50p though :/

The 5D3 does have 50p albeit 1280x720 only although this is an improvement on the 5D2 that did not have 50p at all.

[Steven Digges]

My input on lenses is simple, but serious, I have a lot of trial and error in this a long time ago. Bottom line, buy the best glass you can possibly afford. That means sticking to Canon, Nikon, and any other top name manufacturer that works for your system. And their best line if you can afford it.

For me, it is all about the glass. There simply is no way to take a short cut on manufacturing high quality ground glass, it shows if you do. And ANY camera is only as good as the light is receives from the lens you put on it. And when you pay big bucks for top line glass like a Canon "L" series lens, you get a superior lens in every aspect.

Maybe they have this under better control these days (I don't know because I quit buying aftermarket glass long ago) but it used to be that with knock off lenses the coating was the first thing to go. It may look good out of the box, but your investment had no longevity because the lens coatings were the first thing to fail. I owned Sigmas and Tamrons that only lasted a few years. I have Nikons and Canons that are as good as they were out of the box 25 years ago.

Caveat, I have read so much good stuff here lately about Rokinons I have to admit they have my interest. Maybe the Tamrons and Sigmas have caught up too? I am not THAT old, I have just been doing this for a long time ;) I put all the money I can into lenses!

Steve

[Donald Ong]

Since you're getting either a 6D or a 5D3, definitely go with the canon. F/4 really isn't too bad on the 2nd gen full frame canons and ergonomically, the 24-105 is just leaps and bounds ahead of the tamron.

Coming from a purely video perspective (Still images not evaluated), The canon will give you more reach, no noticeable sharpness difference and much better build quality. I own the canon and have used the 24-70 and really, really hated the focus ring on the tamron. Not only does it focus in the wrong direction, it is incredible stiff and hard to do any sort of rack focus on it. It is also too narrow and the focus throw isn't fantastic. Unless you plan on using a follow focus setup, I feel the tamron is not usable for serious video. (I might just have used a faulty tamron..I'm not sure, but it was quite new and I didn't like it at all). The canon focuses beautifully and smoothly, almost as well as many L primes.

[Joel Peregrine]

"I feel the tamron is not usable for serious video. (I might just have used a faulty tamron..I'm not sure, but it was quite new and I didn't like it at all)."

Either you used one that wasn't adjusted properly or I have one that is different than what is normal-I find the Tamron to focus just fine. The opposite-focus direction is tolerable, probably because I also often use Nikon lenses and am used to mentally switching which way to focus.

[Joel Peregrine]

Originally Posted by Steven Digges

Bottom line, buy the best glass you can possibly afford. That means sticking to Canon, Nikon, and any other top name manufacturer that works for your system.
Steve

Sigma and Tamron have come a long way and also simply make lenses no one else makes. I have the Sigma 120-300/2.8 with OS which kills the sharpness of my first generation 70-200 2.8L IS Canon. It has absolutely no chromatic aberration and is light years better in backlit situations which would cause the Canon to flare or washout. The Tamron is also sharper than the Canon 24-70/2.8 ver. 1 and has stabilization - key for run and gun shooting for me. When I shot crop sensor main-cam the Sigma 17-50/2.8 with OS was great. So sharp. That being said I have 3 30 year old Canon FD L series lenses that were converted to EOS which kick everything's butt around the block.