Tamron's new 24-70mm f/2.8
- Thread starter Moosen
- Start date
snowisawesome
Member
IS should still work for video. My Nikkor with VRII is awesome, I'd never even think of going back to a lens without it.
Jeff_Lo
Active member
This lens is very soft at all focal lengths and I found its sharp spots between 5.6 and 9.0, outside of that above 9.0 it got incredibly soft even in the center of the image. I might've had a bad lens, but I know multiple people who owned this lens that sold it quickly shortly after purchase.
When shooting at a resolution higher than 1080 the softness shines through no matter what focal length or where the iris is set at.
I got rid of this lens very quickly, while it looked good compressed to 1080/720, it showed glaring weaknesses compared to other lenses on the market.
I loved it on my 7D, I can't stress how disappointed I was with it on my Scarlet and other cameras I operated using this lens. I found the Sigma 17-50 to be much sharper. Other issues I had with the 24-70 was purple fringing, soft in the center at times, very short focus throw, and it often fell victim to gravity when shooting at a downward angle.
I also felt it was semi poorly built as I went through 2 and both focus rings broke while pulling focus during concerts.
I might've gotten some bad eggs, but I was highly let down with this lens.
When shooting at a resolution higher than 1080 the softness shines through no matter what focal length or where the iris is set at.
I got rid of this lens very quickly, while it looked good compressed to 1080/720, it showed glaring weaknesses compared to other lenses on the market.
I loved it on my 7D, I can't stress how disappointed I was with it on my Scarlet and other cameras I operated using this lens. I found the Sigma 17-50 to be much sharper. Other issues I had with the 24-70 was purple fringing, soft in the center at times, very short focus throw, and it often fell victim to gravity when shooting at a downward angle.
I also felt it was semi poorly built as I went through 2 and both focus rings broke while pulling focus during concerts.
I might've gotten some bad eggs, but I was highly let down with this lens.
Jeff_Lo
Active member
Everyone will have a different opinion, I personally chose to switch from most Canon lenses outside of a couple (70-200 2.8L IS II, and 100mm 2.8L macro) to Leica R primes and zooms. Unfortunately they're a bit pricey and it takes some time to build a good collection of them since they're no longer made but you can find them here and there, I've found three for incredibly cheap at local thrift shops.
Due to cost I sacrificed a bit of speed, rather than having a full set of 1.4's, most are 2.0's but they produce a much smoother image with a long focus throw. For example, I love this lens http://www.adorama.com/US 471421.html
It's a bit slower than the 24-70, but for the majority of content I shoot in lowlight anyways I use primes. This lens is a bit lower cost in the Leica lineup because it was actually produced by Minolta, but it still is Leica glass, and Leica designed, and is consistent with the other lenses in the Leica R aresenal.
Due to cost I sacrificed a bit of speed, rather than having a full set of 1.4's, most are 2.0's but they produce a much smoother image with a long focus throw. For example, I love this lens http://www.adorama.com/US 471421.html
It's a bit slower than the 24-70, but for the majority of content I shoot in lowlight anyways I use primes. This lens is a bit lower cost in the Leica lineup because it was actually produced by Minolta, but it still is Leica glass, and Leica designed, and is consistent with the other lenses in the Leica R aresenal.