Tamron 28-75 2.8 with Canon 5D ?

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by jean_baptiste_strobel, Jan 12, 2007.

  1. Hi everyone,

    I didn't find the answer to my question in the forums, so I finaly decided to
    post it.
    I have owned a Canon 20D for nearly 2 years now, with Canon 10-22 EFS & 28-75
    Tamron (@ 2.8).
    I'm thinking about upgrading my 20D to a 5D, with full frame and better image
    BUT : is it a uge error to use the 28-75 with the 5D, or would I better upgrade
    my 28-75 to a 24-70 2.8 L ?

    Thank you very much for your advice,

  2. In terms of image quality, the Canon 24-70 is not necessarily an upgrade to the Tamron 28-75. Certainly, the Canon is better built. It is also much larger and heavier. However, my experience (on a 1Ds2) and Pop Photo's tests show the Tamron to have better image quality than the Canon. (The Pop Photo test reports for both lenses are available online.) Here's another test which compares the Tamron favorably to the Zeiss 35/2.8 prime:


    Perhaps to a greater degree than the Canon, the Tamron may suffer from inconsistent quality. For example, my first Tamron 28-75 was sketchy, but my second is excellent. Depending on where your Tamron falls in the spectrum of quality, a Canon 24-70 may be a step up or a step down.

    If this matters, I have essentially stopped using my Tamron 28-75 in favor of my Canon 24-105/4, which I find to be more versatile. I have fast primes for low light and shallow depth of field purposes.
  3. I had the opposite experience. With the same camera (1ds2) and 28-75 and the 24-70, the canon had marginally, (but noticeably) better IQ.

    Anyway, the answer to your question is No.

    Good reasons for getting the 24-70 include, better AF, more respect from camera cognoscenti, increased self esteem, and cool reverse zoom design.
  4. My experience:


  5. BTW, I bought the Canon for better AF and sharpness. I'd consider Zoloft or therapy if you need a self esteem booster :)

  6. I use both, Tamron 28-75 and Canon 5D. The Tamron produce image sharper then the 5D sensor can resolve in most case.
  7. Its not a 'huge error'. My copy of the Tamron is first rate as far as image quality is concerned, and certainly comparable to an 'L' (I've compared it to a friends 28-70L). What lets it down over the 'L' is that its focusing is slower, noisier, and sometimes less accurate. If I had the money, I would buy the 'L' for that reason alone - but alas I don't!
  8. Pop Photo made ridiculous claims that the Tamron 28-75 is BETTER than Canon's 24-70 f/2.8L? What a load! I've used that toy lens from Tamron and besides the utter cheap plastic used in it, the images delivered were far below average. I photographed a model several years ago, and used both the Tamron and Canon's 85mm f/1.8 and anyone I showed the images to, could clearly differentiate between the images taken with the Tamron and those taken with the Canon 85mm. Aside from that, the 24-70 f/2.8L is much sharper than Tamron's and the color rendition is much richer in contrast.
  9. I shoot with a canon 5d mark II and can't tell the differences in my own photos between a Canon 17-40 F4l, Tamron 28-75 F2.8, or Sigma 70-200 F2.8. If I had it to do over again, I would definetely have gone for the Canon L glass just because I like the build quality much better. However, I really don't think I am loosing any jobs because I shoot with a Tamron 2.8 rather than a Canon L.

Share This Page