Reading mode: Light Dark

News Reviews Articles Buying Guides Sample Images Videos Cameras Lenses Phones Printers Forums Galleries Challenges

Now reading: Tamron releases image-stabilized 24-70mm F2.8 zoom 187 comments

187

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

Published Feb 6, 2012 | dpreview staff

Tamron has announced a 24-70mm F2.8 zoom for full frame cameras that features inbuilt optical stabilisation - a first in this class of lens. The SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD, to give it its full name, also incorporates an Ultrasonic Silent Drive motor for autofocus, which allows full-time manual focus. The lens is moisture-resistant, and features a circular aperture diaphragm for the attractive rendition of background blur. It will be produced in Canon, Nikon and Sony mounts, with price and availability to be confirmed at a later date.

Press release:

Tamron develops full-size, high-speed standard zoom with built-in image stabilization – SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD (Model A007)

With class-leading resolution and Tamron’s proprietary VC (Vibration Compensation)

February 6th, 2012, Saitama, Japan － Tamron Co., Ltd., a leading manufacturer of optical equipment, announced the development of the SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD (Model A007), a full-size high-speed standard zoom lens equipped with VC (Vibration Compensation) image stabilization and USD (Ultrasonic Silent Drive), with resolution at the top of its class.

The price and availability of the SP 24-70mm will be announced at a later date.

Product Features

A full-size, high-speed standard zoom with built-in VC ( Vibration Compensation). Even when shooting in low-light conditions with a slow shutter speed to render sharpness, Tamron’s acclaimed VC allows for stable handheld camera work, to more fully enjoy the benefits of this high-speed zoom lens.
Uses special high-grade glass in the three LD elements, three glass molded aspherical lenses, one hybrid aspherical lens and two XR (Extra Refractive Index) glasses, delivering top-of-the-class quality images suited to this high-grade lens. Using a rounded diaphragm, the lens achieves gorgeous blur effects. This rounded diaphragm retains a nearly circular shape even when taken two stops down from its fully open state.
Features Tamron proprietary USD ( Ultrasonic Silent Drive) to power a speedy AF drive together with a continuous manual mechanism.
This high-speed standard zoom lens has a wide-end focal length of 24mm that expands the photographic area.
The lens adopts the new technology including the latest optical design, VC ( Vibration Compensation) image stabilization and USD ( Ultrasonic Silent Drive), all in a lighter and more compact package.
Moisture-resistant construction helps prevent water from penetrating the lens.

Specifications:

Model	A007
Focal length	24-70mm
Maximum aperture	F/2.8
Angle of view (diagonal)	84°04’ －34°21’ (for full frame 35mm format cameras) 60°20’ －22°33’ (for APS-C format cameras)
Lens construction	17 elements in 12 groups
Minimum focus distance	0.38m (15.0 in)
Maximum magnification ratio	0.20x
Filter size	82mm
Length	108.5mm*
Diameter	88.2mm
Weight	825g*
No. of diaphragm blades	9 (rounded diaphragm)
Minimum aperture	F/22
Standard accessories	Flower-shaped lens hood
Compatible mounts	Canon, Nikon, Sony**

* Length and weight values given are for the Nikon mount
** The Sony mount does not include VC, because the body of Sony digital SLR cameras includes image stabilization functionality. The product name for Sony cameras is “SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di USD” without the VC designation

Tags: lens-news, tamron

Gear in this story

Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 Di VC USD

928

I own it

163

I want it

184

I had it

Discuss in the forums

Shop now

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD for Canon (Model A007E) - International Version (No Warranty)	See price on Amazon.com »
Standard Packaging, A007N, Nikon Mount	See price on Amazon.com »
Standard Packaging, A007S, Sony Mount In Stock.	From $1,299.00 »

View Comments (187)

Comments

All (187)

Most popular (5)

Editors' picks (0)

DPR staff (0)

Oldest first

easyliving

Sorry, does it communicate distance infos to Canon and Nikon bodies, to obtain more precise exposure with dedicated flashes?

Mar 25, 2013permalink

johnmcpherson

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...

Nov 19, 2012permalink

TigrouMeow

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

Apr 8, 2012permalink

thegoldenhand

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.

Apr 6, 2012permalink

kayone

@ 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

Apr 6, 2012permalink

canderanet

I mean for my pentax k5

Mar 7, 2012permalink

canderanet

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?

Mar 7, 2012permalink

Eric Sorensen

I might just have to sell my old tyme EF 24-70 and pick this one up (if it's even the least bit sharp). I really need IS, and that new canon 24-70 is way too much.

Feb 18, 2012permalink

(unknown member)

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!!

Feb 17, 2012permalink

Vicariousgeorge

82mm filter?!?!

You can't really tell from the picture, but that is a gigantic lens.

Feb 12, 2012permalink

fpl1966

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.

Feb 11, 2012permalink

moesi

The lens hood would appear to mount to the end of the lens in a fashion that requires the filter ring not to rotate (they note it's a "flower" hood, so not universal in how it must be on the lens). The 28-75mm f2.8 was similar. The barrel extends, but does not rotate and I suspect the same will be true of this lens. It may also be that the front does not extend at all, given that they have called it water resistant. That would be an obvious weakness if it does (and easier to seal if it doesn't).

Plus, you can see that the manual focus ring is near the back of the lens, just behind the gold colored band, which leads me to believe it is internally focused. If the front rotates during AF, you usually rotate the front to focus manually.

Feb 12, 2012permalink

tastop07

Dear fpl1966 & moesi,
1)I 'm sure for the same (non-rotating front element - ideal for C-PL) because of the strong theory about the flower-shaped lens-hood & besides i own the model A005 (70-300mm VC USD) and they have almost the exact same look(the front element of A005 does not rotate).
2)I disagree with your theory (internal focusing & water-resistance) cause otherwise why would a lens need the "lock" button (i suspect to lock the lens at 24mm in order not to extend by it's own weight as you carry it - don't forget 82mm filter means extra weight like 825gr in total !!!). And in addition to the water-resistance matter i believe that the secret is behind the words "moisture-resistance". For me this phrase tells me that only light drops of water can keep out from the inner parts of the lens !!!
And definitely it's a Full TimeManual (focus) lens !
Also see:
http://www.tamron.com.au/di24-70_a007.html

Feb 12, 2012*permalink

Dan

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 =)

Feb 10, 2012permalink

Michael Knight

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?

Feb 9, 2012permalink

Paul Farace

Because the two VR systems will, when working simultaneously, actually crate MORE vibration! Same reason you don't want to use VR when the camera is on a tripod.

Feb 9, 2012permalink

Leok

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

Feb 9, 2012permalink

CraigHarris

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.

Feb 8, 2012permalink

mungozan

There is the IS new Canon 24-70 should have had.

Feb 8, 2012permalink

davidodd

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?

Feb 7, 2012permalink

cordellwillis

Take a look at the comments on here regarding Canon's update of their 24-70 2.8 without IS. Find other forums discussing it too.

Wedding and event photographers want 24-70 2.8 with IS. It's something that's been discussed for years...though I personally can take it or leave it, others have waiting a long time.

Unfortunately Tamron's AF is slow; at least that's been my experience.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

treepop

I have shaky hands. So for me shooting at 1/focal length sometimes means blurry shots. Additionally, it would be nice to be able to shoot 1/50 @ 70mm and still get a tack sharp shot.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

moesi

@cordellwillis; Tamron has only had a couple lenses with the newer USD focusing system (such as the 70-300 f4-5.6 USD VC). My experience with those lenses is that they are nearly as good as the Canon/Nikon lenses. The difference is negligible enough that it is difficult to tell the difference.

The Tamron VC system is really fantastic. If the optics are as good as the 28-75mm f2.8 (I think they will actually be better), then this should be a great lens. Hopefully it isn't too expensive, but how much different is it to make than the 70-300 VC USD? That one runs a very reasonable $450 or so.

Feb 12, 2012permalink

inasir1971

You need IS if you want to take shots at low shutter speeds. My Canon EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS (comparable to 24-88 FF) easily allows me to take shots at or below 1/15 second which is what you need with no flash at reasonable ISO's. It is far better than my 24mm 1.4 because of the very shallow DOF at f/1.4.Without IS what you could have shot at ISO 1600-3200 would need ISO 6400-12800 where noise starts to be a factor.

IS is the norm in this focal length range on virtually every crop factor camera - it hasn't made it to full frame because of the increased size for full frame (note that the Tamron is an 82mm lens) and hence weight and complexity.

Mar 28, 2012permalink

David Emery

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

Feb 7, 2012permalink

harold1968

825g ouch!

Feb 7, 2012permalink

Pete Mc

My advice would be try before you buy.

I bought the 18-270mm with VC only to find it was much sharper with it turned off. The first one I received I thought might be faulty, but the replacement was exactly the same. You get amazing specifications on Tamrons, but unfortunately the results aren't equally impressive.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

astrocrab

this is because of camera settings. VC is powering on during shooting so it makes picture blurred. VC must be turning on _before_. now i have very useful VC in still and especially in video mode.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

Carbon111

My 18-270 was a dog. Soft throughout its entire range with or without stabilization, even micro-adjusted. Even my "kit" Canon EF 28-135mm was a lot sharper.

Sold the Tamron and bought a EF 24-105mm f/4L - *fantastic* lens!

The whole experience soured me on ever trusting Tamron as a brand again.

The new Canon 24-70 is stupid-expensive but if its *actually* as sharp as the MTF charts imply I may have to get one...seriously.

Feb 8, 2012*permalink

Sassylass

Thanks for mentioning that factor! I've been debating about what to do w/mine for that very reason. I'll run out & try it w/VC off, or it's going back while under warranty to have it checked out!!

Mar 1, 2012permalink

Debankur Mukherjee

The first 24-70 to have image stabilization ......will nikon and canon follow.....

Feb 7, 2012permalink

Zebooka

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/02/07/Canon_24-70mm_F2p8_II_24mm_f2p8_IS_28mm_f2p8_IS

Feb 7, 2012permalink

Argote

Sony has had IS on the Carl-Zeiss 24-70/2.8 SSM for a couple of years now...

Feb 7, 2012permalink

MSTR Photography

I don't know about Canon, but Nikon has a patent on file in Japan for this lens. However, I see three problems with this lens. One is the filter size - 82 (ugh!). Two focusing speed with Tamron will not compete with Canon, Nikon, or Sony. Three and worst of all, external focusing.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

tastop07

Dear MSTR Photography,
1)The new Canon 24-70mm also has 82mm filter.
2)Did you try the AF speed of new A005(70-300mm VC USD)?
I have one and in practice is very quick (running through the whole scale at 70mm takes about 0.7 of a second !!!)
Believe me !
3)It depends on why someone wants this lens. Do you really want to shoot outdoors when raining. Besides Tamron says that this is a moisture-resistant lens, so some light rain won't hurt the lens...a tempest though eh...well that's another story !!!

Feb 13, 2012permalink

KetanJ

$600? Welcome to papa

Feb 7, 2012permalink

Steve oliphant

oooops 82mm filter tilt no good waste of money the filter will kill you trust me i know i sell them ................

Feb 7, 2012permalink

DWR0082

Sentences are your friend. While not ideal this + 82mm filter is still going to be way less than a Nikon 24-70.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

Geez, how many filters do people still use? I had a bunch of filters back in the film days, but the *only* round filter I use these days in the digital age is a polarizer. I don't think an 82mm filter size is as big of an issue as some people seem to think it is.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

CraigHarris

Compared to prices of lenses an 82mm UV is not that bad.
The only other round filter of use these days is a CPL, and ND, ND Grad & CPLs can easily be used in square format and an 82mm adaptor for such is a mere $10

Feb 8, 2012permalink

BayAreaHair

I suspect the larger filter size is to get better edge sharpness for Full Frame camera's. DX camera's only use the center portion of the lens. However, us Full Frame users uses the whole lens and if making the lens wider give me better edge sharpness as did the Canon 24-70 F2.8II then so be it.

Feb 27, 2012permalink

Len_Gee

Could be a killer lens for both Crop Sensor and FF cameras..
Who wants a Canon dated 24-70 L with no IS?
Canon better get off it's ass and put out the 24-70L IS sooner than later.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

Zebooka

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/02/07/Canon_24-70mm_F2p8_II_24mm_f2p8_IS_28mm_f2p8_IS
HAHA :)

Feb 7, 2012permalink

Mr Fartleberry

Nikon announces 36MP. Canon pro users stuck with their new "magic pixels" for several more years.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

Rupert Bottomsworth

What does that have to do with this lens from Tamron?

Feb 7, 2012permalink

astrocrab

nikon's 25'000 ISO in boost vs canon's 200'000 ISO in boost. i agree.

Feb 7, 2012*permalink

Bgn007

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.

Feb 7, 2012*permalink

astrocrab

i have tamron 28-75 2.8 (FF) on 7D (crop) and i must say lens worth it's money

Feb 7, 2012permalink

Photomonkey

Looks great.
I had the 28-75 and though it was sharp the FOV at 75mm was more like 60mm.

Hopefully this one answers that problem.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

Anfernee Cheang

Nice Tamron. 82mm filter definitely will cost more, by I think I can expect better border performance from this design.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

kewlguy

Kudos Tamron! I hope it is optically sound!

Feb 7, 2012permalink

Ben Tomohiku

Nice replacement of 28-75!

Feb 7, 2012permalink

jhinkey

Now if Nikon would make a 24-85/2.8-4 AFS VR (and way way better than the old 24-85/2.8-4D) I'd be set.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

tastop07

...and maybe to win the lottery !!! (no offense !)

Feb 13, 2012permalink

ChipperGuy

Long over due, with or without VC. I agree disappointed that the Pentax mount is missing - but then I can't remember when I was last asked for a new Pentax mount lens :(

Now to see what Tamron has in store for the m43 mount....

Feb 7, 2012permalink

locke_fc

No Pentax mount? That's disappointing, Tamron

Feb 6, 2012permalink

nekrosoft13

no, offense but pentax doesn't have much of a future

Feb 7, 2012permalink

Zebooka

Pentax is no longer producing main stream cameras. See Q and K-01 and all colorish Kore-Ja-Naj "cameras". Toys for Japan teens, nothing more. Bad QC. Lots of problems...
It is sad, but it's a competition market.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

fberns

Pentax promised more new cameras (DSLRs) this year.
I wish they would do better on the markets, they produced some great cameras.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

Argote

Could be because this focal range is more suited to Full Frame cameras while Pentax only does APS-C (and Medium format).

Feb 7, 2012permalink

ManixM

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

Feb 6, 2012permalink

Nismo350Z

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

Feb 6, 2012permalink

AppleboyJR

how much will it cost?

Feb 6, 2012permalink

T34

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!

Feb 6, 2012permalink

Lucas_

You may be confusing Tamron with Sigma...

Feb 6, 2012permalink

Steven

Tamron is far from junk. There 28-75 Di is a very sharp lens and one of the best bang for buck lens.

Feb 6, 2012permalink

Francis Carver

Nikkor is junk.

Feb 6, 2012permalink

antares103

Generalizations are junk.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

ChipperGuy

Tamron does well in the limited offerings, many feel the 28-75/2.8 is worthy of the Nikon and Canon offerings. Having owned the Canon version of the Tamron, it was well worth the savings over the Canon version.....

Feb 7, 2012permalink

dylanbarnhart

Everybody please send me your junks. I need them :-)

Feb 7, 2012permalink

gonzalu

Junk is Junk :P

Feb 7, 2012permalink

Ben Tomohiku

well, it gives people who couldn't afford an N or C 24-70 a very good choice. Choosing Tamron or Sigma has always been a budget choice. You will get what you pay for, so don't blame off brands. I meant, why not? Having one more budget choice is always a good thing, isn't it?

Feb 7, 2012permalink

nekrosoft13

Sorry T34 you confused Sigma with Tamron. Sigma is always a lottery. Tamron just like Tokina is much more solid

Feb 7, 2012permalink

DWR0082

My Tamron 17-50 2.8 begs to differ. Sharpest zoom I've ever used and I got it for only $375 a couple years back.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

Ben Tomohiku

Agree with Nekrosoft, lots of sigma fast prime lens have shift focusing problems.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

CraigHarris

If you actually bothered trying them before writing them off, you'd find that Canon's cheaper lenses are far lower quality than 3rd party lenses.

The appeal for this lens though is that there isn't a Canon equivalent!

Feb 8, 2012permalink

Klarth

Another man's junk...

But i agree that Sigma QC is deplorable.

Mar 17, 2012*permalink

NovemberSun

Refreshing to see some genuine competition rolling out finally

Feb 6, 2012permalink

Dan

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.

Feb 6, 2012permalink

JensR

The X10's lens is a 7.1-28.4mm f/2.0-2.8.
If you want to compare that to a lens on "full frame", this can be done, but not by multiplying only one set of those numbers.
The X10's lens is equivalent in angle of view, depth of field control and ability to capture total number of photons per time to a 28-112 f/8.0-11.0 lens on "full frame".

Feb 6, 2012permalink

Francis Carver

Nonsense. That is photographic folklore, combined with urban legend.

Truth is, an F2.8 lens is an F2.8 lens. Image circle is another story.

Who would be idiotic and desperate enough to spend two bits and an apple on a zoom lens that can open up to F8 or F11, anyhow?

Feb 6, 2012permalink

JensR

No, it's completely true - everything I said. I said "number of photons" - not "density of photons".
It's simple physics, but I have realised by now that people are very reluctant to accept it. They will rather believe that they get a "28-112 f/2.0-2.8" lens. Strange though that their "28/2" shots do look nothing like a real 28/2 looks on "full frame". Wonder why that is... ...well, if you understand what I said in my first post, you won't need to wonder any more.

Generally, I would not buy an F8 to F11 zoom lens - which was exactly my point. Such a lens can be very compact, though - so it's not as "idiotic" as you might think.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

ChipperGuy

In the end it is what people will be willing to spend. And carry around. I remember when the 28-105/2.8 was around. It was a great lens, but did not sell well due to the size and cost at the time.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

rbach44

I'm afraid you ARE mistaken. The amount of light captured by say one f/2 lens is similar to all f/2 lenses (well for the most part, actual transmission may vary), what you're thinking of is DOF.

As the exit pupil (actual focal length / f number) decreases in size, the DOF increases, which is where that whole equation came from. As far as the amount of light captured, it stays the same. It is unaffected by focal length (Which is essentially the only different between the Fuji lens and full frame lens)

If what your saying is true, then the f/2.8 aperture of a Canon 400mm f2.8 captures ~30 times more light than the Canon 14mm f2.8, and we all know THAT isn't true…

Feb 7, 2012permalink

JensR

The light densities (photons per area and time) of all f/2 lenses are the same - but I never said anything else.
But an f/2 lens on "full frame" will cover roughly twice the area than f/2 on APS-C with that same photon density, so it captures twice the number of photons per picture and unit of time.

Hence, your 400/2.8 and 14/2.8 example is just not what we are discussing. As they both project onto the same sensor, they of course project the same number of photons per time and image _as_well_as_ same number of photons per area and time.

Your reasoning that focal length is the only thing different is incomplete. It is quite clear that the aperture diameter (in mm) is different as well. Which brings us back to my original point.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

TTMartin

Remember the f/2 is a ratio of the true focal length. So with the tiny sensor of the Fuji X10 the true focal length of the lens is only a few mm. So the lens opening is half of that. Given the monster depth of fields tiny lenses have to start with, the Fuji X10 really not that impressive, nor does it's technology translate well to larger lenses.

Feb 29, 2012*permalink

Thomas Kachadurian

Sign me up. The real question is will this put any pressure on Canon to finally update the now-ancient 24-70L

Feb 6, 2012permalink

taylorzhang

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

Feb 6, 2012permalink

Jogger

Ive been shooting the Nikkor 24-70 for almost 3 years, i dont think ive ever needed IS/VR once. If you are shooting under 1/60, youre going to get motion blur from your subject... so, nice sharp background and blurry subjects.

Feb 6, 2012permalink

Dan

I shoot a Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 on a DX body, and I know I could benefit greatly from VR. Video shooters could also benefit from VR.

Feb 6, 2012permalink

StephenSPhotog

I agree with Jogger. I have the Canon 24-70mm and I've never needed IS. It's looking like the Canon 24-70mm II will not have IS and I'm glad. Of course everyone else is complaining about it.

Feb 6, 2012*permalink

Hugo808

If you don't like VR just switch it off. Duh!

Feb 6, 2012permalink

footdoc66

Not a matter of switching it off, it's a matter of paying for something you don't want or need.

Feb 6, 2012permalink

questionlp

Adding to footdoc66, is the extra weight and 82mm filter size worth it if one doesn't need VR/IS?

For me, I'll stick with faster primes that don't weight down the camera as much.

Feb 7, 2012*permalink

davidbindle

I've definitely wished I had IS a few times. Whether it be some posed wedding pictures where the subjects are not moving, or taking some lower light scenics in the canyonlands of Utah. We can't always have tripods with us, especially when carrying a baby back pack. I have both the older 28-70 2.8L and the somewhat newer 24.70 2.8L and the 5DMkII and 60D. I use IS all the time with my 70-200 2.8L IS at 70mm (well, throughout the range...) Someone else pointed out... it is nice to have in video mode as well. I say well done Tamron... now I just hope the quality is right up there. I doubt it would be sub $1K though... or does someone know this.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

mwirayudha

Sometimes we don't need that shallow dof. That's where VC come in handy...

Feb 7, 2012permalink

PicOne

FYI.. not all subjects move.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

tkpenalty

Is there a bit of sentimentality speaking there?

Feb 7, 2012permalink

questionlp

There's a reason why there are as many kinds of lenses as there are styles and schools of photography. I have several lenses that have VR/IS and use them when I need reach (70-200mm f/2.8 and 70-300mm VR). For the 24-70mm focal length range, I just can't justify the size, weight and cost... with or without VR/IS.

I don't use fast primes only for shallow DOF or for nostalgia; instead, I like to travel as lightly as possible and it fits the photography that I do.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

CraigHarris

Some subjects don't move; others can be frozen with flash ... plus when shooting in dark rooms, I'd rather have 1 tiny bit of motion blur in the frame than the whole photo destroyed by camera shake.

IS isn't needed all the time, but there's a switch to cover than ... then when conditions require such you can still take great photos :)

Feb 8, 2012permalink

TTMartin

@Dan - it wasn't the need for VC that made your shots blurry, it was the awful slow hunting autofocus system that Tamron lens has. Hopefully, Tamron's SLD will perform as well as Canon's USM and Sigma's HSM.

Feb 29, 2012*permalink

G Davidson

I hope the VC doesn't interfere with the quality, the way it did with the 17-50mm VC compared to usual versions. If so it makes a lot more sense than the Canikon versions, weighing almost as much, but offering much better low-light capabilities.

I know from the Tamron lenses I have (non-VC 17-50mm, 90mm macro) that they can make incredible lenses when they put their minds to it. I also dont hear as much about quality variation as with Sigma, it seems that what you see is what you get. I'm actually thinking this could hint at to an even better version of the 17-50mm as well.

Feb 6, 2012permalink

Photogaz

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

Feb 6, 2012*permalink

Mescalamba

Expect 2 - 3 eV. 4 eV is except some longer telephotos from Nikon/Canon just wishful dreaming.

Feb 6, 2012permalink

Photogaz

That's great but why is only ever Canon state their stops?

Feb 6, 2012permalink

cordellwillis

In a lot of ways I would say to mention the number of stops for IS is marketing.

Feb 7, 2012permalink

CraigHarris

Whilst 4 stops would be awesome, 2 stops would be enough to make a difference; I think they should publish this information, but I'm happy to wait for a review for such as I won't consider a purchase without reading in-depth reviews anyway.

Feb 8, 2012permalink

Bjorn_L

Looks like a real winner based on specifications. The proof will be how it preforms optically. if it as good as their 28-75 f2.8 I am interested.
If I could wish for two things only it would be a little higher magnification, 1:2 instead of 1:5 and of course 85mm on the long end. But as is, it is interesting enough to make me want to learn more about it.

Feb 6, 2012*permalink

photo nuts

Absolutely brilliant. I am sure this lens is gonna be a major seller for Tamron.

Feb 6, 2012permalink

R Valentino

There are Pentax users?

Feb 6, 2012permalink

Edgar_in_Indy

Have you ever thought about applying to work in the camera department at Best Buy? I think it'd be a good fit for you.

Feb 6, 2012permalink

grahamdyke

1. Tamron stopped making lenses in Pentax mount over two years ago. The last one they did was the 10-24.
2. Pentax don't have a FF camera, so don't need FF lenses.
3. Pentax SR is in body, so don't need VC.
4. All The Tamron VC and Sigma OS lenses are inferior optically to their non VC/OS predicessors.
5. This will NOT be as good optically (IQ) as the existing Tamron 28-75 FF lens, which is now 8 years old.
6. It will carry a 50% price premium over the Tamron 28-75.

Feb 6, 2012permalink

Edgar_in_Indy

I think you mean that Tamron has stopped RELEASING new Pentax lenses. They still make and sell a variety of lenses for Pentax.

Just because a lens supports FF, doesn't mean APS-C users won't want to buy it. The Tamron 28-75mm is a good example.

True, we don't need VC (thanks Pentax!), but lens makers are starting to include it on a lot of lenses. Luckily, SR can be disabled in the body and/or the lens.

IQ is yet to be determined. Canon and Nikon make some stabilized lenses with excellent IQ, so it can certainly be done.

All that being said, there are reasons I would consider replacing my 28-75mm with this lens:

1. This lens has silent focusing. May also be quicker (That's yet to be seen.)

2. At the wide end, 24mm provides much more flexibility than 28mm on an APS-C camera.

3. According to the press release, this lens has a "moisture-resistant construction". If true, then that would make it an excellent match for Pentax DSLR's, several of which are weather-sealed.

Feb 6, 2012*permalink

rtogog

Pentax will re-badge it as they did on Pentax DA 18-250 ?

Feb 6, 2012*permalink

Mescalamba

Probably no, cause today Pentax isnt yesterday Pentax. Not sure where Ricoh make their lens, but I think that will be source of current Pentax lens.

Tho considering their A12 module, why not..

Feb 6, 2012permalink

Luis Fonseca

Thanks Tamron, you just made me go Sigma. Thanks Sigma for your K-mount lenses.

Feb 6, 2012*permalink

Edgar_in_Indy

Once again, Pentax users get snubbed. Oh well, I guess I'll just use my Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 forever, and keep looking to Sigma when I want to burn some cash.

Feb 6, 2012permalink

tkbslc

I don't think it is a snub as much as a business decision based on projected sales. They didn't make it for Olympus or Sigma SA either.

Feb 6, 2012permalink

Edgar_in_Indy

I'm quite sure the Pentax DSLR user base now is significantly larger than it was several years ago when Tamron made lenses for Pentax. If there were sufficient numbers back then to justify supporting K-mount, then why have they started to pull back recently?

Feb 6, 2012*permalink

tkbslc

I see a lot of comments about price. Is it listed somewhere or is it all speculation?

Feb 6, 2012permalink

CrunchyLens

Generally speaking Tamron, Sigma and Tokina price their "equivalent" (i.e. ones that have a 1st party counterpart) at a lower price point. By how much varies greatly, and there are exceptions (the sigma 50mm f/1.4 for example) and most of the time the lower price is deserving due to lower image quality indicative of the "you get what you pay for" lens ecosystem.

In this case I am more hopeful, and would happily purchase this over the 24-70 II if the IQ is up to snuff.

tl;dr: speculation.

Feb 6, 2012*permalink

Latest sample galleries

Canon RF 800mm F11 IS STM sample gallery

Sigma 85mm F1.4 DG DN sample gallery (DPReview TV)

Sony a9 II sample gallery

Olympus 100-400mm F5.0-6.3 IS sample gallery (DPReview TV)

See more galleries »

Latest in-depth reviews

Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark IV initial review

The Olympus OM-D E-M10 IV is the company's entry-level DSLR-shaped mirrorless camera. While it has a higher resolution sensor and new processor, its biggest focus is on selfies.

The Sony a7S III is a 12MP full-frame camera primarily designed with video in mind. We take a look beyond the specs to see what it offers to filmmakers.

The Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III is our favorite Micro Four Thirds camera for stills shooters to date. It jam-packs plenty of cool/useful features into a small, tough-built package that's a pleasure to shoot with and thus, has earned our silver award.

Tested: Four travel tripods for every budget

Although image stabilization technology has come a long way, there are few things you can do to improve your low-light or telephoto images more than using a tripod. In this roundup we take a look at four travel tripods and pick our favorite.

First impressions: ON1 360 is a cloud-based alternative to Lightroom's ecosystem

ON1 joins the ecosystem game with ON1 360, a subscription service and mobile app for iOS and Android that syncs the photos you choose between devices and ON1 Photo RAW on the desktop. Here are our first impressions using it.

Latest buying guides

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that might be a bit older but still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

What’s the best camera for under $1500? These midrange cameras should have capable autofocus systems, lots of direct controls and the latest sensors offering great image quality. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $1500 and recommended the best.

What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera for under $2000? These capable cameras costing less than $2000 should be solid and well-built, have both speed and focus for capturing fast action and offer professional-level image quality. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $2000 and recommended the best.

Long-zoom compacts fill the gap between pocketable cameras and interchangeable lens models with expensive lenses, offering a great combination of lens reach and portability. Read on to learn about our favorite enthusiast long zoom cameras.

Check out more buying guides »


Just posted: Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD lens review May 20, 2013	Just Posted: Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD samples gallery Nov 18, 2012	DxOMark looks into lenses for the Sony SLT-A99 Jul 3, 2013	Go wide! Hands-on with Canon's 11-24mm F4 L Feb 6, 2015

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

Tamron develops full-size, high-speed standard zoom with built-in image stabilization – SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD (Model A007)

Comments

You may also like

More about gear in this article

Latest sample galleries

Latest in-depth reviews

Latest buying guides


The Big Catch by Domenick Creaco from grey challenge	Led Z. 1977 America Tour, Detroit-0003 by vbuhay from 70s Nostalgia	NeoStrike by McWoodley from Comet NEOWISE