RF 24-105 f/4 vs Tamron 35-150 f/2.8-4

steelmouse3 · Dec 30, 2019

Bhotoz said:
I've sold 2 Tamrons because they didn't work with my R or M50. Hopefully Tamron has learned their lesson for the future.

J A C S · Dec 30, 2019

Something else to consider: the RF zoom has an amazing IS. According to Canon, it talks to the sensor (with RF lenses only) and this makes it more efficient.

Bhotoz · Dec 30, 2019

steelmouse3 said:
steelmouse3 said:

I've sold 2 Tamrons because they didn't work with my R or M50. Hopefully Tamron has learned their lesson for the future.

Click to expand...

I think they have. They have a compatability list on their site. All of the newer Tamrons work fine and some of the older ones may be getting firmware updates.

https://www.tamron.com/faq/products/canon_eos_r.html

I've read Tamron 150-600 (v1) didn't work properly after fw-update either? Whatever, I bought used Sigma C for 550€, sold Tamron and became happy.

The other Tamron was 90 VC macro, didn't work with M50, sold it after I bought EF-M 28mm - maybe my favourite EF-M lens!

shawnphoto · Dec 30, 2019

steks said:
I am thinking of buying a FF camera, and for 99% sure it will be The EOS RP. Now I primarily use my 77D with a Sigma 17-50 f/2.8, furst and foremost i want some extra tele range some extra DOF would be nice but is really necessary.

What would (in terms of image quality) be the better lens?

The Tamron's AF is supposedly second rate. And the focus ring moves while the AF is operating, which seems kind of odd. All the reviews I've seen indicate the lens hunts a lot in low light. But that could be the inferior DSLR focusing systems in play as well.

I would buy the lens if they had an RF mount version.

steks · Dec 31, 2019

Thanks for the extra things to think about. I doubt I will miss the 24-35mm range and I can surely use the bigger aperture and 105x150mm range. But maybe the best idea is to rent a Canon RP with both lenses a try it out myself.

Larawanista · Dec 31, 2019

shawnphoto said:
steks said:

I am thinking of buying a FF camera, and for 99% sure it will be The EOS RP. Now I primarily use my 77D with a Sigma 17-50 f/2.8, furst and foremost i want some extra tele range some extra DOF would be nice but is really necessary.

What would (in terms of image quality) be the better lens?

Click to expand...

The Tamron's AF is supposedly second rate. And the focus ring moves while the AF is operating, which seems kind of odd. All the reviews I've seen indicate the lens hunts a lot in low light. But that could be the inferior DSLR focusing systems in play as well.

I would buy the lens if they had an RF mount version.

Kindly share the link of those reviews that says it hunts on lowlight focus because I've used mine is such scenario and there was no hunting, whether I was using touch to focus or half-pressing the shutter button.

shawnphoto · Dec 31, 2019

Noogy said:
shawnphoto said:

steks said:

I am thinking of buying a FF camera, and for 99% sure it will be The EOS RP. Now I primarily use my 77D with a Sigma 17-50 f/2.8, furst and foremost i want some extra tele range some extra DOF would be nice but is really necessary.

What would (in terms of image quality) be the better lens?

Click to expand...

The Tamron's AF is supposedly second rate. And the focus ring moves while the AF is operating, which seems kind of odd. All the reviews I've seen indicate the lens hunts a lot in low light. But that could be the inferior DSLR focusing systems in play as well.

I would buy the lens if they had an RF mount version.

Click to expand...

Kindly share the link of those reviews that says it hunts on lowlight focus because I've used mine is such scenario and there was no hunting, whether I was using touch to focus or half-pressing the shutter button.

I'll do you a favor and google this for you!

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/tamron-35-150mm-f-2-8-4-di-vc-osd--a047--review-33869/verdict

Conclusion: "Sometimes AF can hunt"

https://www.lightandmatter.org/2019...l-around-tamron-35-150-f-2-8-4-vc-osd-review/

"The major drawback of the lens is its somewhat slow autofocus speed, which makes it tricky (though not impossible) to use for shooting sports and action."

https://www.thephoblographer.com/20...-35-150mm-f2-8-4-di-vc-osd-canon-ef-on-eos-r/

"In terms of autofocus performance, it wasn’t optimal in real-world settings."

MAC · Dec 31, 2019

J A C S said:
Something else to consider: the RF zoom has an amazing IS. According to Canon, it talks to the sensor (with RF lenses only) and this makes it more efficient.

this

MAC · Dec 31, 2019

shawnphoto said:
steks said:

I am thinking of buying a FF camera, and for 99% sure it will be The EOS RP. Now I primarily use my 77D with a Sigma 17-50 f/2.8, furst and foremost i want some extra tele range some extra DOF would be nice but is really necessary.

What would (in terms of image quality) be the better lens?

Click to expand...

The Tamron's AF is supposedly second rate. And the focus ring moves while the AF is operating, which seems kind of odd. All the reviews I've seen indicate the lens hunts a lot in low light. But that could be the inferior DSLR focusing systems in play as well.

I would buy the lens if they had an RF mount version.

this

and the RF lens has nano speed

and 24 mm is a must for me

watch Dustin Abbott's reviews of both

MAC · Dec 31, 2019

steks said:
I am thinking of buying a FF camera, and for 99% sure it will be The EOS RP. Now I primarily use my 77D with a Sigma 17-50 f/2.8, furst and foremost i want some extra tele range some extra DOF would be nice but is really necessary.

What would (in terms of image quality) be the better lens?

sell the sigma because it is a FF equivalent of a f4.5 lens that is soft in the corners

get the RP + RF 24-105 F4 L for $1899

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1480999-REG/canon_eos_rp_mirrorless_digital.html

they will include the adapter and a bag and a card

the bag fits your 77d + 55-250 stm and the RP + 24-105 f4 L

now you got 24-400 fov without changing lenses in a small setup

don't snooze - you'll likely loose -- they'll raise prices by $300 - could be raised in the next few hours

steks · Jan 1, 2020

MAC said:
shawnphoto said:

steks said:

I am thinking of buying a FF camera, and for 99% sure it will be The EOS RP. Now I primarily use my 77D with a Sigma 17-50 f/2.8, furst and foremost i want some extra tele range some extra DOF would be nice but is really necessary.

What would (in terms of image quality) be the better lens?

Click to expand...

The Tamron's AF is supposedly second rate. And the focus ring moves while the AF is operating, which seems kind of odd. All the reviews I've seen indicate the lens hunts a lot in low light. But that could be the inferior DSLR focusing systems in play as well.

I would buy the lens if they had an RF mount version.

Click to expand...

this

and the RF lens has nano speed

and 24 mm is a must for me

watch Dustin Abbott's reviews of both

I will watch the reviews again, but in my memories he was positive about the Tamron.

steks · Jan 1, 2020

MAC said:
steks said:

I am thinking of buying a FF camera, and for 99% sure it will be The EOS RP. Now I primarily use my 77D with a Sigma 17-50 f/2.8, furst and foremost i want some extra tele range some extra DOF would be nice but is really necessary.

What would (in terms of image quality) be the better lens?

Click to expand...

sell the sigma because it is a FF equivalent of a f4.5 lens that is soft in the corners

get the RP + RF 24-105 F4 L for $1899

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1480999-REG/canon_eos_rp_mirrorless_digital.html

they will include the adapter and a bag and a card

the bag fits your 77d + 55-250 stm and the RP + 24-105 f4 L

now you got 24-400 fov without changing lenses in a small setup

don't snooze - you'll likely loose -- they'll raise prices by $300 - could be raised in the next few hours

I won’t keep the 77D I only want one body. And I will hardly use more than 150mm, if I need a bit more I will crop.

I live in Europe, so I won’t buy at B&H.

steks · Jan 1, 2020

shawnphoto said:
Noogy said:

shawnphoto said:

steks said:

I am thinking of buying a FF camera, and for 99% sure it will be The EOS RP. Now I primarily use my 77D with a Sigma 17-50 f/2.8, furst and foremost i want some extra tele range some extra DOF would be nice but is really necessary.

What would (in terms of image quality) be the better lens?

Click to expand...

The Tamron's AF is supposedly second rate. And the focus ring moves while the AF is operating, which seems kind of odd. All the reviews I've seen indicate the lens hunts a lot in low light. But that could be the inferior DSLR focusing systems in play as well.

I would buy the lens if they had an RF mount version.

Click to expand...

Kindly share the link of those reviews that says it hunts on lowlight focus because I've used mine is such scenario and there was no hunting, whether I was using touch to focus or half-pressing the shutter button.

Click to expand...

I'll do you a favor and google this for you!

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/tamron-35-150mm-f-2-8-4-di-vc-osd--a047--review-33869/verdict

Conclusion: "Sometimes AF can hunt"

https://www.lightandmatter.org/2019...l-around-tamron-35-150-f-2-8-4-vc-osd-review/

"The major drawback of the lens is its somewhat slow autofocus speed, which makes it tricky (though not impossible) to use for shooting sports and action."

https://www.thephoblographer.com/20...-35-150mm-f2-8-4-di-vc-osd-canon-ef-on-eos-r/

"In terms of autofocus performance, it wasn’t optimal in real-world settings."

Overall they are pretty positive about the Tamron or not?

Larawanista · Jan 1, 2020

steks said:
shawnphoto said:

Noogy said:

shawnphoto said:

steks said:

I am thinking of buying a FF camera, and for 99% sure it will be The EOS RP. Now I primarily use my 77D with a Sigma 17-50 f/2.8, furst and foremost i want some extra tele range some extra DOF would be nice but is really necessary.

What would (in terms of image quality) be the better lens?

Click to expand...

The Tamron's AF is supposedly second rate. And the focus ring moves while the AF is operating, which seems kind of odd. All the reviews I've seen indicate the lens hunts a lot in low light. But that could be the inferior DSLR focusing systems in play as well.

I would buy the lens if they had an RF mount version.

Click to expand...

Kindly share the link of those reviews that says it hunts on lowlight focus because I've used mine is such scenario and there was no hunting, whether I was using touch to focus or half-pressing the shutter button.

Click to expand...

I'll do you a favor and google this for you!

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/tamron-35-150mm-f-2-8-4-di-vc-osd--a047--review-33869/verdict

Conclusion: "Sometimes AF can hunt"

https://www.lightandmatter.org/2019...l-around-tamron-35-150-f-2-8-4-vc-osd-review/

"The major drawback of the lens is its somewhat slow autofocus speed, which makes it tricky (though not impossible) to use for shooting sports and action."

https://www.thephoblographer.com/20...-35-150mm-f2-8-4-di-vc-osd-canon-ef-on-eos-r/

"In terms of autofocus performance, it wasn’t optimal in real-world settings."

Click to expand...

Overall they are pretty positive about the Tamron or not?

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/canon-rf-24-105mm-f-4l-is-usm-review-32799/performance

They rated the Tamron 5, the RF24-105mm 4.5. Photoblogger rated both lenses 4.

--
"Photography is therapeutic."
https://500px.com/joshcruzphotos

JoWinter · Jan 1, 2020

Larawanista said:
Larawanista said:

Overall they are pretty positive about the Tamron or not?

Click to expand...

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/canon-rf-24-105mm-f-4l-is-usm-review-32799/performance

They rated the Tamron 5, the RF24-105mm 4.5. Photoblogger rated both lenses 4.

Well, let's look at the scores:

Canon RF 24-105:

Features 5/5, Handling 5/5, Performance 4.5/5, Value 4/5 -- Overall 4.5

Tamron 35-150:

Features 4.5/5, Handling 5/5, Performance 5/5, Value 5/5 -- Overall 5

So it's very close by any means. The Tamron is less expensive but if one doesn't have an adapter yet (which is likely for first-time R buyers thinking about a walk-around zoom lens) its cost has to be figured in. Maybe also the cost of Tamron's USB dock for future firmware updates. And then there is the soft factor of having a native lens versus an adapted third-party lens.

At least for me, the small performace advantage the Tamron might have is less important than the Canon's convenience.

Larawanista · Jan 1, 2020

JoWinter said:
JoWinter said:

JoWinter said:

Overall they are pretty positive about the Tamron or not?

Click to expand...

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/canon-rf-24-105mm-f-4l-is-usm-review-32799/performance

They rated the Tamron 5, the RF24-105mm 4.5. Photoblogger rated both lenses 4.

Click to expand...

Well, let's look at the scores:

Canon RF 24-105:

Features 5/5, Handling 5/5, Performance 4.5/5, Value 4/5 -- Overall 4.5

Tamron 35-150:

Features 4.5/5, Handling 5/5, Performance 5/5, Value 5/5 -- Overall 5

So it's very close by any means. The Tamron is less expensive but if one doesn't have an adapter yet (which is likely for first-time R buyers thinking about a walk-around zoom lens) its cost has to be figured in. Maybe also the cost of Tamron's USB dock for future firmware updates. And then there is the soft factor of having a native lens versus an adapted third-party lens.

At least for me, the small performace advantage the Tamron might have is less important than the Canon's convenience.

If you're ok with the 24-105mm range in the hands of the majority, go for it.

Bhotoz · Jan 1, 2020

JoWinter said:
JoWinter said:

JoWinter said:

Overall they are pretty positive about the Tamron or not?

Click to expand...

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/canon-rf-24-105mm-f-4l-is-usm-review-32799/performance

They rated the Tamron 5, the RF24-105mm 4.5. Photoblogger rated both lenses 4.

Click to expand...

Well, let's look at the scores:

Canon RF 24-105:

Features 5/5, Handling 5/5, Performance 4.5/5, Value 4/5 -- Overall 4.5

Tamron 35-150:

Features 4.5/5, Handling 5/5, Performance 5/5, Value 5/5 -- Overall 5

So it's very close by any means. The Tamron is less expensive but if one doesn't have an adapter yet (which is likely for first-time R buyers thinking about a walk-around zoom lens) its cost has to be figured in. Maybe also the cost of Tamron's USB dock for future firmware updates. And then there is the soft factor of having a native lens versus an adapted third-party lens.

At least for me, the small performace advantage the Tamron might have is less important than the Canon's convenience.

I'm sure they are both pretty good, but different lenses. One has to decide, does he/she need 24-33mm range or 106-150mm more. And does one need f2 8 at wide end or not. And what other lenses one is possibly going to use with that lens. And does one care about bigger and heavier adapted lens. Etc.

By the way, I've noticed really akward to use both RF and 2 or more EF lenses with 1 adapter in the field. It would be much easier to have own adapter to every EF lens (less hassling with adapter changes, but takes more space in your bag), or just adapted lenses (you can leave adapter to the body).

steks · Jan 1, 2020

Well if it comes down to personal preference I think I will choose the Tamron. I just want to take some nice family pictures and with two small kids I don’t want the inconvenience of changing lenses anymore. Besides my 17-50mm/2.8 I own a 55-250/4-5.6, 18-135/3.5-5.6 and 2 primes (YN35&50) I whish there was an 18-135/2.8 than I would be happy. I even have bought the Tamron 35-150 and used it on my 77D for a week, but 35 on a crop body is a bit to narrow at the wide end for me so I sent it back.

If there was a 35-150/2.8-4 with an RF mount i would definetly but it so maybe I have already decided.

thunder storm · Jan 1, 2020

Bhotoz said:
By the way, I've noticed really akward to use both RF and 2 or more EF lenses with 1 adapter in the field. It would be much easier to have own adapter to every EF lens (less hassling with adapter changes, but takes more space in your bag), or just adapted lenses (you can leave adapter to the body).

That is quite a factor. You really should go with the most important lenses adapted only or the most important lenses RF mount only.

Bhotoz · Jan 1, 2020

thunder storm said:
Bhotoz said:

By the way, I've noticed really akward to use both RF and 2 or more EF lenses with 1 adapter in the field. It would be much easier to have own adapter to every EF lens (less hassling with adapter changes, but takes more space in your bag), or just adapted lenses (you can leave adapter to the body).

Click to expand...

That is quite a factor. You really should go with the most important lenses adapted only or the most important lenses RF mount only.

Yeah. I've had EF 16-35 f4, RF 24-105 and Sigma 100-400 with me for landscapes. Hoping especially for RF 100-400... and maybe 2nd R body too.

RF 24-105 f/4 vs Tamron 35-150 f/2.8-4

Well-known member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Leading Member

Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts