Which lens, Tamron or Canon?

[leeblackman]

I'm trying to learn photography. I have about half a dozen how to

books that I'm trying to learn from, including a new subscription to

some photography magazines. I've been shooting since about march on

two different entry level camera bodies, and am noticing a big

difference between my first and latest exposures. I have a Nikon N75

and a Canon Rebel Ti. I like them both, but am sometimes finding the

28-80mm and 35-80mm a little limiting. Sometimes I could ask for a

little more reach and others to just widen a little more. I'm going

to invest in a better EOS body (posted in another question) but I'm

trying to figure out what lens to get. I don't really do any type of

specific shots, sometimes I need wide angle, sometimes normal,

somtimes telephoto, so I want just one nice zoom lens that does it

all.

 

These are the three I'm considering so far:

 

Tamron AF 28-300mm /3.5-6.3 XR Ultrazoom

Tamron AF 24-135mm /3.5-5.6 Superperformance

Canon EF 28-135 /3.5-5.6 USM Image Stabalized

[marcin harla]

Canon 28-80 is not a good lense, so whatever you choose will be probably better. Canon 28-135 IS USM sounds good, but you said you would like to go wider sometimes. I haven't heard anything about Tamron 24-135, but it's 4mm wider, so maybe it's worth a closer look.

On the other hand why are you upgrading to better camera? Elan 7 is not that much better than Rebel Ti (mirror lock is the only real benefit of the old Elan 7). For now you're better off buying some better glass and then upgrade a camera IMHO. How about Canon 28-135 IS USM with Canon 24mm f/2.8 prime? You'll see much better results with decent glass and Rebel Ti than with Elan 7 and so-so glass (but again, i have no experience whatsoever with Tamron, maybe it's not so bad after all).

Think twice before you'll trade that Rebel for Elan (unless you're not loosing much on that trade, it's probably not worth it yet).

[marcin harla]

Oh I've just read your previous post. Seems like your going to get the new Elan7N. Upgraded AF and E-TTL II may be worth the upgrade.

[kevin_hundsnurscher]

I haven't been as happy with the Tamrons as I have with the Canon lenses. The motors were very loud compared to the Canon lens motors which are as quiet as a whisper.

[chris_carroll]

Lee, in your other thread I suggested you get the Elan 7 to avoid

reliability problems, plus the fact the EOS-1's autofocus sensor

won't work correctly with any of the lenses you're considering.

 

May I suggest that if you are trying to learn photography, owning

at least one fixed focal-length lens in addition to a super-duper

zoom would be good? It ain't just hypeﾗlearning to use a prime

makes you better and more disciplined. I like Canon's 28mm

f1.8 and 35mm f2 equally, and they would give you some low

light ability the others don't (the IS lens is nice, but sometimes

you need a faster shutter speed, too.)

 

Also, if money is a concern, I think it's highly unwise to own two

practically interchangable camera systems (take it from me.)

Getting rid of one of them now would be money in the bank.

[eddie_chan4]

Forget about buying the Elan 7 or used EOS 1. Keep your Ti. Ti may not be a very advanced camera, but it's a very practical one. As you say you're trying to learn photography, Ti is good body to start with.

 

You say "sometimes I need wide angle, sometimes normal, sometimes telephoto". How about getting the Canon 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 first. Then, save some money, sell your N65 and buy the Canon 70-200mm f/4. They have the same filter size and you'll have the range from 24 to 200 with aperture from 3.5 to 4.

[shaun westlake]

I'll second Eddie's recomendation but reccomend the Tamron 28-75 F2.8 xr DI over the Canon 24-80. A little bit faster at 2.8 throughout the entire zoom range. In informal tests I found the Tamron produced much better enlargements with better colour/contrast. Personally I do not miss the extra 4mm on the wide end. Also uses the same 67 mm filter size as the 70-200 f4L. Toss in the 50mm F1.8 and you have a decent and versatile set of glass without breaking the bank.

[michael_villarmia]

Since your question was about Tamron vs. Canon, I'll say go for Canon most of the time. This way, you'll run into less compatibility issues and won't have a problem should you ever resell the lens.<p> Aside from that, my recommendations are to sell the Nikon system and the other zooms and buy a 24/50/85 prime kit. May be a little expensive, but the optical quality will be better than what you are looking through now.<p>If your complaint is that its too expensive, then take some extra time and save up for better glass (primes or zooms). Mediocre glass isn't worth it. Get a 50mm now for $70 and wait until you have more money to buy the better lenses.<p>I'll get off this soap box now. *evil grin*

[vinny_walsh]

I had the previous version of that 28-300 tamron and would not advise in the newer

model. I can't see how they could have improved it enough to make it much sharper. It's

a dud.

My model was also lens of the year by whoever tamron says just like the XR model you

spoke of.

[alec_holst]

i think it's safe to say that a canon lens will almost always be better the a lens such as tamron, but probably more expensive as well. I have the Tamron AF 24-135mm /3.5-5.6 Superperformance and it does come in handy. I have an eos 1n and sometimes its very hard to autofocus using this lens and is also very loud. i also own a canon 50mm 1.8 and looking through the viewfinder with this lens is a lot better then with the tamron. It is more clear and bright with the canon and also seems sharper. I don't know if this is the case with all canon lens but certainly is with the 1.8 compared to the tamron. So basically if you don't mind having to manual focus sometimes and noise is not really a huge issue for you then the tamron should be a good all around lens. By the way, how much does the tamron sell for, i got mine new with my camera for practically free.

[andrew robertson]

Chris, just for the record, any Canon EOS camera's AF sensor(s) work perfectly

correctly with any EF lens.

[rob_murray]

I would keep the TI body, has plenty of features to keep you

shooting for many years. Ditch the boring 35-80 lens and get

a Canon 22-55mm USM (discontinued but my favorite) and the

Canon 75-300mm USM lens..Throw in a 50mm F1.8 and you can

cover a lot of ground without breaking the bank...

Dont get one of those 28-300 do all lens...

[simonpg]

The trap is to spend too much on the body and try to save money on a lens. The body is only a light box, but the lens is absolutely critical. Get as good a quality lens as you can afford. If you can't - wait 'til you have the money or you will end up flogging what you buy, losing money on it and buying what you should have bought in the first place.

 

If you buy an EOS body, try to buy a quality EF lens and not a Tamron or other after market lens. Why? Because you may end up with firm-ware compatability problems later; Canon USM is faster and quieter; Canon lenses mostly have features that are very valuable like constant manual focus capability, non-rotating front. Buy second hand (carefully) if you can't afford new.

 

Be careful not to get carried away with lenses that offer huge zoom ranges eg 28-200 or 70-300; they have much lower quality optics and are often slow (f4.5 and slower). With zooms it is often best to accept that you end up with 2: say 28-70/80/90/105mm range and 70-200mm. BUT avoid bottom end consumer type lenses. You can detect these initially if they have plastic lens mounts instead of metal.

 

Maybe (depending on your budget) you will find a second hand canon 28-70mm f2.8L or even its predecessor the 28-80mm f2.8L since they released the 24-70 version. Yes, expensive new but it's a thought since it is a superb pro lens.

 

I have a 24-70mm f2.8L and added a 28-105 f3.5-4.5 USM lens for on the road light travel. I have been very impressed by the images, most of which compare very well to my L series. I bought that over the 28-135 f4.5-5.6 IS USM because the 28-135 was a bit slower (and bigger/heavier) and some tests showed that the optics on the 28-105mm were better. But look for this sepcific version of the 28-105 since Canon recently released a slower and cheaper vesion (plastic lens mount) that is not as good.

 

Remeber with lenses, basically you get what you pay for.

[yakim_peled1]

<p> Lenses come with a dazzling variety of sizes, weights, build qualities, optical qualities and, naturally, prices. <a href="http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html">This</a> is a good start. Then, when you got the basics, search this forum for specific lenses. You'll find plenty of info.<p>

 

 

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>

[mark u]

I see several posters have suggested that there might be problems with the compatibility of Tamron lenses. I don't know where they get these ideas from, as I have never heard of a case of that kind of problem with a Tamron lens.

[chris_carroll]

Andrew, I'll stick with my previous assertion the original EOS-1's

autofocus system works less than perfectly with lenses of

maximimum aperture less than f2.8. The vertical component of

the cross-type BASIS sensor doesn't activate, and it was very

noticable in use when I would mount a lens such as the 75-400

f4-5.6. This limitation was corrected on the 10s, which is still a

great camera, and very cheap used.

For confirmation, check here (and elsewhere):

http://photonotes.org/other/ai-servo.html

Although I don't have the camera or manual any longer, I think it

was documented by Canon, as well.

[chris_carroll]

Sorry, should have said 75-300 f4-5.6 in the above post.

[doug_harhai]

Lee,

When I bought my Elan 7e, I bought the 24-135 Tamron to go with it. I had only been shooting for a year. As I have progressed (in shooting experience only, I am still not happy with the quality of my images!) I tend to use the 24-135 less and use prime fixed focal length lenses more often (esp. 50mm 1.4 USM). I foresee a day in the near future when I will sell the 24-135 and buy a set of fixed focal lenses--24, 35, 100, maybe a super tele, to go with my 50mm (I don't think that I will be selling it soon enough to help you, though). The reason for selling it is primarily in the size difference and image quality--fixed focal lenses are generally (generally) better than the one-size-fits-all lenses (I have a set of FD fixed focal lenses that I use with manual Canon bodies so I have experience shooting both). However, I would not have done things differently, first buying the zoom and then moving into primes. The reason: using such a wide range zoom lens gave me the opportunity to capture quickly-fleeting shots that I would have missed with a fixed focal lens, while I debated the best way to compose, which lens to use, etc. Also, after having used a zoom, I know which ranges I like to gravitate toward--I gravitate toward the lower ends (24--50mm) while the higher ends of the lens do not get used often. I now know on which lenses to spend my money first.

[wilfred_m_rand]

Tamron's two very best lenses (IMHO) are 17-35 XR Di and 28-75 XR Di. Superb quality - L-class results, excellent build. The Canon 28-135 IS is notoriously soft as the focal range approaches 135.

[andrew robertson]

Chris, you're right that the cross type sensor won't fully activate. The lens still operates

just fine, however autofocus will operate less reliably on dim or low contrast targets.

[chris_carroll]

Right. We agree on my original assertion--the original EOS-1's

AF system doesn't work correctly with the slow zooms under

consideration here.

[troll_underbridge]

I would second the suggestion for the 28/50/85mm prime set. Good sharp photos, large apertures, and if you wanted the EOS1 and just had to have it(very fine cameras) then they would activate your sensors fully. Then you could really learn the discipline of the craft and the results would be godd enough to keep you interested and thirsty for more.

 

Better yet at least get the 50mm 1.8 and go to the local community college and take a photography class. You will then learn properly on slide film and will be forced not take short cuts and will have a better idea as to exactly what you want when your done.

[poul]

i'll tell you what i did. i got cheap canon body, 50mm 1.8 - for most of planned shoots, and sigma 28..300 for snapshotting everything. that setup taught me a lot. both lenses are cheap, and when you outgrow sigma, you just throw it away or keep for emergencies. 50mm will teach you to see and show what a really good lens can do, 28..300 sigma (or tamron - doesn't matter much) will give you shots you won't get otherwise.

[andrew robertson]

Chris, I don't agree. The function of the camera is to only use the horizontal part of the

sensor for lenses slower than f/2.8. With an f/4.0 lens, horizontal sensor only, it still is

functioning 'correctly'! You are implying that the sensor doesn't function in the prescribed

manner, which isn't true. It's just that the AF sensor has limitations, like all AF sensors.

 

I agree that the EOS-1 can't AF as accurately as the EOS-1n with slower lenses or in

adverse conditions! But to imply that the EOS-1 is somehow broken is incorrect. It just

doesn't perform as well.