Tamron releases image-stabilized 24-70mm F2.8 zoom

Everyone is so hung up on technology these days...

Don't loose sight of the what the technology is for, to allow you to 'see' and record what you see.

If you cannot see the best technology is useless.

Remember, it's not about the camera...

Amazon Japan: This item will be released on April 26, 2012.

bhphoto has it on preoder for $1299. i am a bit disappointed in the price. but i guess since its on preorder bhphoto just put the msrp there. hopefully once the stocks come in it starts to level off around $1099 or best case $999.

@ Eric Sorenson from what I read on Adorama, the Tamron only seems to be priced about $100 less than the canon version, however its about $300-400 less than the Nikon version

I mean for my pentax k5

I've bought tammy 18-250mm and 70-200mm for myentx k-5 and planning to keep buying tammy lens. But after this news telling that no pentax mount for this 24-70mm lens, that mean tammy force us to buy sigma? Is that right?

I cannot understand why neither Nikon nor Canon make an IS 24-70mm or 24-85mm lens. IS is absolutly necessary for video. Canon have the 24-105mm f4 but it is softish and loses 2 and a half stops in the corners at f4.

Why a company that does not make DSLRs, let alone HDSLRs is the only one to do an IS 24-70mm is just crazy- like going to a hospital with no beds, or making a car with three wheels.

Next we'll discover that the D800 does not provide peripheral illumination correction for video, and that the Canon 24-70mm f2.8 II is yet another dud.

But I bet that this is mostly plastic! and that IQ is not any use on 35MP because the lens droops as it extends, like a cheesy Nikon unmentionable.

It is difficult to realise that these design choices are all made to frustrate us, and get us to pay out for the next programmed "improvement" Duh!!

unfortunately, as far I understood, it is not internal fucusing (front lens rotate). Make a bit annoyng using filters as C-PL I think. Not a big issue, you can live with it.

Lens request for Tamron: The Sony R1 has a 14.3-71.5mm F2.8-4.8 zoom lens (equivalent to 24-120mm). I'm willing to carry around a little more weight if you can give us 1.5 crop users something like a 16-85mm F2.8 or even a 16-105mm! I don't mind an 82mm or larger filter size if it means I can get such a lens =)

Another idea...how about a 17-55mm F1.8? I always wish I could have the F1.8 that primes offer, but I can't stand not being able to zoom! How come there aren't any zooms brighter than F2.8?

Maybe these lenses would cost $3000. Oh well. It's fun to dream =)

I wonder, why the Sony mount removed the VC.

I understood that Sony has in-body IS. but I doubt the cost difference between Canikon mount vs Sony mount. if that's the case, can't Tamron put the VC on the Sony mount?

Imagine, IS on both body AND lens. users will gain more than 4 stops!! how come no manufacturer is doing this?

Wow where can I get one?

Since switching to Nikon (from Pentax) to get FF I've really missed having VR in my short lenses. I'll use it a lot, it allows low light shooting without a tripod - even the mighty D700 does have noise at high ISOs

I'm struggling to believe the attitude of most people's responses - how can anyone think IS is useless? People seem to be slagging off scenarios without actually encountering them and comparing the image quality with and without IS for a given situation.

The 1 over focal length rule is an absolute bare minimum which I don't like being close to as it's not good enough, to get away with 1/70th at 70mm you have to hold the camera extremely still ... almost everyone should see a better image at 1/200; however IS allows sharp photos at 1/10th meaning the photographer can concentrate on the content of the image and not worry about other factors that might kill the photo quality.

IS can make a massive difference in many situations - what I really want is Canon's 24-70 f/2.8L with IS, but they clearly aren't going to bothering offering it which means I then need to carry a 24-105 f/4L IS plus a selection of primes for when f/4 is not fast enough.

I eagerly await the review of this lens.

Honest question. Why would you need IS on a fast lens with a max reach of 70mm? The extra weight etc is significant for limited utility? How many would want to shoot <1/70 for portraits etc?

I guess '82mm is the new 77mm' (largest filter size...) :-)

This lens is for full-frame cameras, i.e. for serious photographers that have invested over $2K in their camera boddies alone. And no serious photographer wants to compromise the IQ for a few hundred dollar cheaper lens.

This lens better be good, otherwise nobody will buy it.

No Pentax mount? That's disappointing, Tamron

Yihaaa - I am numer 100.
It is my day - I will buy a lotto coupon.
Merry X-mas.

I look forward to owning this lens, but I don't look forward to playing lens lottery.

how much will it cost?

Well, so you think this lens will be the equal of a Nikon or Canon 24-70mm f2.8? Guess again! You get what you pay for in Life, Tamron lenses are Junk! For every Ten they make, maybe your lucky enough to get one that's actually sharp, the rest will be soft. Don't waste your money!

Lens makers, I want something with more range! How come the Fuji X10 can have a 28-112mm F2-2.8 while larger sensor shooters are stuck with lenses like this 24-70 that only zooms less than 3X? Is it because it will be too big? I would LOVE to have a 24-120mm F2.8 with VR. A lot of people liked the 28-105mm F2.8, and with today's technology, I would think that more could be done. With more cameras supporting in-camera lens distortion correction, I'm excited about the future of lenses.

this looks just right, hope it's a bit lighter

How many stops is the IS? Don't Tamron mention these things in their press release?

There are Pentax users?