Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 G2 vs. Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS

[DoishPelota]

It seems that most comparisons of the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 G2 have been with either Canon's 24-70mm f/2.8L II (no IS) and Sigma's 24-70mm f/2.8 Art (ineffective OS). I'm using a Canon 6D so haven't considered the Nikon's 24-70 availability.

Any thoughts on Tamron's f/2.8 G2 vs. Canon's f/4L IS? Open to your lens recommendations in this focal range for the Canon EF mount.

Some of my conclusions have been:

1. Lower stop: Tamron provides better low-light ability (f/2.8 vs. f/4) and its hand-held functionality should be comparable since they both have VC/IS equivalent - any thoughts on Tamron's VC vs. Canon's IS?
2. Heavier weight: Tamron's is 905g (Canon mount) vs. Canon's c.600g. The difference of 300g is quite large but reviews point to Tamron's weight improving stability (as compared with Canon's f/2.8 equivalent).
3. Sharpness: Tamron at f/4 is comparatively sharper (with less vignetting) than Canon at f/4 (based on the lens comparison tool at Digital Picture). Both seem to deal with chromatic aberration well but coma seems to be better on the Canon.
4. Bokeh: Tamron's 1st gen 24-70mm suffers from criticism on "onion bokeh" and it seems the 2nd gen has smoothed out this concern. Since Tamron's benefit is f/2.8 and f/3,2 over the Canon, this could be a concern as those looking to use the lower stops may be faced with making bokeh'd images they aren't happy with.
5. Autofocus: Canon's AF is native (obviously) but Tamron's is reverse engineered. Online reviews don't seem to raise much AF issues with the Tamron (at least on Canon mount).
6. Price: Tamron comes in at US$1,199 vs. Canon's US$899, the primary reason for making such comparison as I am in the market for my first zoom lens (within 24-70 range).

 

[diness]

It seems that most comparisons of the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 G2 have been with either Canon's 24-70mm f/2.8L II (no IS) and Sigma's 24-70mm f/2.8 Art (ineffective OS). I'm using a Canon 6D so haven't considered the Nikon's 24-70 availability.

Any thoughts on Tamron's f/2.8 G2 vs. Canon's f/4L IS? Open to your lens recommendations in this focal range for the Canon EF mount.

i own the Tamron G2 as well as the Canon 24-105 f4L I haven’t owned the 24-70 f4 though

Some of my conclusions have been:

1. Lower stop: Tamron provides better low-light ability (f/2.8 vs. f/4) and its hand-held functionality should be comparable since they both have VC/IS equivalent - any thoughts on Tamron's VC vs. Canon's IS?

The Tamron has excellent VC. It is very effective and pretty much silent. It is definitely better than the is on my Canon, and while the canon 24-70 has newer stabilization than the 24-105, I doubt that it’s better than the Tamron

1. Heavier weight: Tamron's is 905g (Canon mount) vs. Canon's c.600g. The difference of 300g is quite large but reviews point to Tamron's weight improving stability (as compared with Canon's f/2.8 equivalent).

Im not sure about the weight improving stability necessarily. The Tamron is heavy, no doubt about it. For me it is worth it to get that f2.8 aperture.

1. Sharpness: Tamron at f/4 is comparatively sharper (with less vignetting) than Canon at f/4 (based on the lens comparison tool at Digital Picture). Both seem to deal with chromatic aberration well but coma seems to be better on the Canon.

My Tamron is quite sharp, better than my 24-105 for sure. The 24-70 f4 is also sharp, so I’m sure iq is somewhat similar

1. Bokeh: Tamron's 1st gen 24-70mm suffers from criticism on "onion bokeh" and it seems the 2nd gen has smoothed out this concern. Since Tamron's benefit is f/2.8 and f/3,2 over the Canon, this could be a concern as those looking to use the lower stops may be faced with making bokeh'd images they aren't happy with.

i had the g1 Tamron and the onion Bokeh was noticeable. I have found it to be more pleasing with the g2, and yes the extra stop is nice for background blur as well

1. Autofocus: Canon's AF is native (obviously) but Tamron's is reverse engineered. Online reviews don't seem to raise much AF issues with the Tamron (at least on Canon mount).

The af has been really nice on the g2 for me. The g1 was not as good. I have tested the g2 side by side with my 24-105 and was surprised to find the g2 is faster! It has been accurate as well. Of course, if you don’t want to worry about af at all, it’s always safest to go with Canon

1. Price: Tamron comes in at US$1,199 vs. Canon's US$899, the primary reason for making such comparison as I am in the market for my first zoom lens (within 24-70 range).

Both lenses are good, it all depends what you want. Tamron improved build quality, af, VC and Bokeh with this g2 lens and I really like it.

Get the Tamron if you want: f2.8 for background separation and low light ability.

Get the canon if you want: lightweight, macro feature and no worries about af or future compatibility

me personally, I wanted the f2.8, so I went with Tamron and I don’t regret it. Good luck!