I've read elsewhere (photozone, etc) that when reviewing the Tamron's they get very mixed results depending upon the lens copy they are testing...moreso apparently than Canon. This really worries me. It's easy to get stuck with a an underachieving copy or that it could have been better (unless you buy multiple copies, test the heck out of them, and return the others - if even possible). I guess I'll wait for the Canon 24-70 II and see what sort of results it achieves. In the meantime, I've rented the Canon 24-70 twice now for concerts while waiting for the II.
The photozone review said that the focus shifts at higher apertures... making me wonder if this test was done correctly (or if it was a really wonky lens). I'm looking at the corner crops for 35mm and 50mm on the Tamron and they're actually WORSE at f5.6 than f2.8. Can that be right?
The new Canon should be nice, but truthfully I was happy with the original. I was just really hoping to see something around its level with IS
Comments
http://www.facebook.com/cdgImagery (concert photography)
http://www.cdgimagery.com (concert photography)
http://chrisdg.smugmug.com (everything else)
The new Canon should be nice, but truthfully I was happy with the original. I was just really hoping to see something around its level with IS