Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L USM AF vs Tamron 28-75 XR DI LD Macro Lens

[haunting_your_thoughts]

Hello All,<br><br>

 

I am pleased to inform you all of my recent purchase of the Tamron 28-

75 XR DI LD Macro Lens for $389.99

<br><br>

If you are battling between which lens to get... Here's an eye

opener...

<br><br>

These are reviews available using Adobe Acrobat

<br><br>

<A href

="http://www.popphoto.com/assets/download/8212003124116.pdf">Review

of Tamron 28-75 XR DI LD Macro Lens</a><br><br><br>

 

 

<A href

="http://www.popphoto.com/assets/download/782003105411.pdf">Review of

Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L USM AF</a>

<br><br><br>

 

The Canon lens is awesome for someone who's got money to spend...

however, its only about 5% to 10% better in optical quality than the

Tamron. True that it's an "L" series lens, but does "L" really

deserve the extra $800.00? That question is up to your wallet, or

your bank - the wife if you are married.<br><br>

 

I heard talks about Tamron discontinuing it's amazing 28-75 lens

because of high demand and low price. You've heard the talks about

the 28-75 lens. I would recommend the 24-75 lens only if you need

the extra 4 mm. If not.. By all means, Tamron is your next bet

because the price is unbeatable, and the quality is very similar to

the 24-70 f2.8 L series Lens by Canon.<br><br>

 

However since this is a Forum, your comments and interpretations of

the lenses are welcome. Which lens would you rather buy?

[pto189]

This is not the forum to discuss the comparision between the Canon 24-70 and the Tamron 28-75. You should have posted this threat at Canon EOS forum instead. However, this topic has been discussed extensively virtually every week for the last 15 months.<p>

What standard or method did you use to make your conclusion that the Canon is not $800 better the Tamron? Do you think the 2005 Winbledon male champion is $600,000 better than the runner-up? Do you think the Porsches Carrera is $60,000 better than the Nissan Z 300ZX?<p>

If you think the Tamron 28-75 serves you well, buy the Tamron.<p>

I have both Canon 24-70 and Tamron 28-75.

[haunting_your_thoughts]

Do you think you can drive a porche on a regular road and not be afraid of any scratches or dents? If you have the money to throw away... surely you can afford both... which in your case is obvious.<br><br>However, Not everyone is rich and not everyone can afford even an SLR camera without making a big hole in their wallet.<br><br>The reviews of both lenses are quite similar to each other, and though you might try to justify that the Canon L is the best of the best... It does not mean that the Tamron isnt the best of the best either.<br><br>Since you are so bent on claiming that Canon is the BEST, why dont you do your own series of tests and see what's the difference? I bet you wont see any unless you are being TOO picky.<br><br>Finally, it depends on what type of DSLR you have as well.

[craig_gillette]

I don't have my ear to the ground but see no reasonable reason to expect that a company would dump a high demand product. The obvious response isn't stop selling it, it's raise the price. But they want to sell them, not discourage buyers.

 

The alternative is to bite the bullet and spend the extra bucks of you can't live without either the slight quality improvement or the different focal range. I'd buy the Tamron if I was a Canon user. If I really believed it was going to be discontinued, I'd buy it quickly. If I needed it.

[athinkle]

Tamron wouldn't discontinue the thing: They'd put a new finish on it, ad one more element with god knows how many "digital specific" oxide coatings, and market it as the revamped "V" or "III" or some such thing. Add an extra fifty bucks to the price tag, every drools for the new lens element, and everyone's happy.