New Lens

[Squidy]

Hi all,

I purchased a Tamron 24-70 VC DI a few months ago for my 5DS. It's never been able to work in Liveview and even the focus points are off a lot of the time. All my other lenses are fine. The store I bought it from feel bad as I spend a lot of money there, so they've offered to trade it in at close to retail value on a 24-70 Canon 2.8 II

I had a gig the other night for a good band that was meant to be paid, but the focusing was so off I can't actually charge them. Even in bright sunlight it's off even if the person is standing in front of me. Tamron said maybe a firmware will fix it, but their latest firmware is over a year old, so I need to send my lens away for 6-8 weeks to potentially find out the firmware is already up to date (the lens is only 3-4 months old)

So, I just wanted to know what you thought? I've read some reviews on the lens and the only thing I don't like is no IS, so for low lighting it might not perform too well when the shutter speed drops.

Can someone please recommend a good zoom apart from the 24-70 Canon I can look into as an alternative? I was looking at the 16-35 but it might not have enough reach. The 17-50 has also been mentioned.

Thanks!

[Kayaker72]

I am a fan of IS, but I would honestly take your local store up on their offer for the 24-70 II. It is a great lens. When needed, compensate for IS with using higher ISO.

If you do not get it, and want to keep your 5Ds, next options would be canon's 24-70 f/4 IS, or 24-105 f/4 IS (mk 1 in circulation, mk 2 coming in Oct). But I am assuming you want f/2.8.

If you are ok with having a multiple lens solution for the focal range, you could go mid-range primes, a combination of two or three of the 24 mm f/2.8 IS, 28 mm f/2.8 IS, 35 f/2 IS, 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8. It is unfortunate that Canon has not yet introduced IS into all its mid-range primes yet. My take there would be, in descending order: 35 f/2 IS, 85 f/1.8, 24 2/8 IS, and 50 f/1.4. I know I am a zoom centric photographer living in an increasingly zoom centric world, but I do not want to understate primes and "zooming with your feet." I know a couple of photographers who primarily shoot with 1 to 2 prime lenses. They have average zooms, but most of their work is done with their primes. They have just adapted their shooting style to that "limitation" and they produce excellent work. I would also consider the Sigma 35A, 50A (I've owned both, excellent optics), and the Tamron 35/45/85 f/1.8 primes have IS/VC and are getting excellent reviews.

As for the 17-50, if it is the lens I am thinking of, that is for APS-C and would not work on the FF 5Ds. There is a Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, but it doesn't have IS/OS and does not seem to be in the same class as the Canon/Tamron versions (based on Bryan's results, good at 24 mm, but falling apart at 50-70 mm).

So, personally, I would go for the following options in order:

1. Take your shop up on their offer and trade the Tamron straight across for the Canon 24-70 II
2. If you can return the Tamron 24-70 VC, do so and buy 2-3 primes. Or one "L" prime like the 35 II.
3. If not one of the above, send the Tamron in for repair and hope for the best. But my thought is same as yours, it should have the current firmware if you only bought it a few months ago.
4. Go with a Canon f/4 zoom, but I am thinking you want f/2.8.

Sorry to hear about your troubles. Good luck.

[Manofmayo66]

I have shot with both the Tamron & the Canon 24-70 Mk2. For mission critical (paid) work, I would go with the Canon hands down (and I am a prime guy). I shot a hip-hop dance competition with the Canon and got some stunning shots. I never missed the IS.

Good Luck!

[Squidy]

Sorry, I should have clarified, they're going to trade it back to close to full retail value on the Tamron. So for example I'd trade the Tamron in for $1100 then pay the extra $1500 for the 24-70 2.8 II

To be honest I think that's going to be the route I take, I love the image quality of the Tamron but this issue has really left a bad taste in my mouth.

I'm also tempted to trade my 70-200 2.8 up to the 70-200 F4 IS

[Kayaker72]

Squidy. I'd look online. The 24-70 II is not typically more than double the Tamron. At least here in the US, the Tamron is $1,299 and the 24-70 II is $1,749 after rebate.

But, if you have time, I would watch the Canon refurbished store. I picked mine up for less than that. Looking at the current sale list, it doesn't look like it is included, but Canon's website is down so I can't double check. Alos, if you want the 70-200 f/4 IS, that is a great price.

[Busted Knuckles]

While I have the 70-200 ii 2.8 is. I seldom shoot it at 2.8.

It would be interesting to wait for the new 24-105. I love the utility of the original but it is too soft on the long end for me. I am hopeful that the long end will be better.

Moving f4 means it is almost a 2 for 1 in the lens count budget for 1 stop. Hmmmm

[Karsaa]

My tamron had the same, not working at all with my 5dsr, firmware update fixed it, but still it is not the most nicest focuser.

[peety3]

What lens did you have before buying this one, and why haven't you just gone back to that?

[Squidy]

Hi all,

Sorry for the delay, I've been busy with work.

The lens I had before I sold, it was the 24-105 but I wanted to move to 2.8. I was going to check the refurb store but then I'd have to pay the full amount whereas the store traded my Tamron in for $1200 meaning I only had to pay $1300 for the Canon.

Anyhow, I got the 24-70 2.8 non IS and I must say I'm impressed. It focuses way quicker than any other lens I've used and it's perfect. You focus on something and its so sharp, not like the Tamron where you'd lose over 30% of your shots. I thought it was my bad camera holding, I now know it's not the case as every single thing I've shot on the Canon has been perfectly in focus.

To say I'm loving this lens is an understatement.

[Busted Knuckles]

Glad to hear your success.