The Best 24-70mm f2.8 Lens You Can Buy
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 08. 2024
- Buy the Tamron here: www.bhphotovid...
Buy the Nikon here: www.bhphotovid...
Buy the Sigma here: www.bhphotovid...
Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR Lens:
www.bhphotovid...
📸15% off our Professional Photography Tutorials: Use Code CZcams
➡️fstoppers.com/...
🦸♂️15% off our photo course The Well-Rounded Photographer featuring 8 different professional photographers: Use Code CZcams
➡️fstoppers.com/...
Subscribe to the Fstoppers CZcams Channel:
➡️www.youtube.co...
Our Gear: 📷 and 🎥Workflow Recommendations:
🥰Our Favorite Gear
➡️fstoppers.com/...
🎸Music in our videos🎶
Artlist.io
➡️bit.ly/36hgJal
Epidemic Sound
➡️bit.ly/3aaE7GJ
💻Software📀
Adobe Creative Cloud
➡️ bit.ly/3hjVXdE
Luminar Neo
➡️ skylum.evyy.net...
Capture One
➡️ captureone.38d4...
🛒🏪🛍 Support Fstoppers by shopping at:
B&H Photo and Video
➡️ www.bhphotovid...
Amazon
➡️ amzn.to/3hkTEXS
🤳🏻Follow Fstoppers on Instagram:
➡️ / officialfst. .
Follow Lee and Patrick's Puerto Rico Instagram:
➡️ / fstopperspr
The moment this guy said he needs a lens to look cool, I was out.
Yea, some have mentioned this... it's a great review on VR etc, however this review fails to mention Tamron's biggest flaw. The biggest reason to go Nikon over Tamron is how often the Tamron misses focus. Also, if you shoot with continuous focus, the Tamron does terribly. Nikon is twice the price, but when you're shooting something important like a wedding, I can't tell my clients that my gear prevented me from getting the shot.
with regards to wildlife i find the tamron 70-200 very good vs my nikon 200-500.
K B87 I have both the lenses you mention. How can you compare them to each other ??? One starts where the other stops !! And is twice the size !!. And as for shooting wildlife. The Nikon is awesome and an absolute out and out bargain for the price. The Tamron is nice but a focal length of 200mm even on the D500 just isn’t close enough for most wildlife photography.
Yes this is most important thing actually. I have 15-30 G2 and it also misses, however at those focal lengths you can usually get away with slightly out of focus image, especially if 2.8 is not used or camera to subject distance is a bit larger. But on 24-70 I must expect at least 95% of shots in focus or I can't rely on such lens for important tasks.
The Sigma OIS needs to be set (configured to operate by shutter half press) with their docking station, that's why it appeared not to be working.
By default the Sigma OIS is configured to only operate as you're taking the picture to conserve battery.
That is right. I also own the Sigma version and i have no issues with OS in video recording
So nice to see a review with an actual conclusion and recommendation. Too many reviewers are afraid to tick off sponsors or alienate viewers with hedged recommendations. Nice job here FS!
I've used all three. My fav is the Tamron.
Gold band going out of style?? What?? I think the silver looks bland and personality-less. The gold looks so official and pristine.
Donald Trump has entered the chat...
Video is 5 years old. My old Nikon G died so here I am and this review helped me make up my mind. Thanks Morris
There is one huge problem for me with the Sigma and Tamron lenses. I'm a sport photographer, shooting quite often in bad weather conditions. I can't imagine myself shooting with Sigma and Tamron, both lenses extend when zooming in and out... so do Nikon, but Nikon does that under the lens hood! Shooting with Sigma and Tamron in the rain at 70mm you will get your lens wet and when you zoom in back to 24mm all that moisture goes inside the lens! I'm not sure how well they are weather sealed but I don't think it's good when water gets pulled inside the lens.
Nikon... different story, first of all the lens doesn't extend a lot (just around 18mm) and it's all covered by the lens hood! Winner for me every single wet day! :)
My only issue with the Nikon is the fact its a little to close to the end at 24mm. Fine at 70mm but often get spots at 24mm. Sacrifice i suppose for having the wide option. amazing lens though
This is the best side-by-side review of the Tamron and Sigma currently on CZcams. Great job - many thanks.
Yes! I own a Tamron, after trying out the Sigma for a week. I wasn't happy at all with that lens. The G2 is a major improvement and definitly the best choice. Great review btw. Keep it up!
Of course ! Nikon is better but my budget not allowed but Tamron. You are right.
@@duckhanhpham4753 It's 3 years in the future now and I sold my Tamron a year ago and went with native Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8E and 70-200mm f/2.8E FL... Again, worlds apart from the Tamron..
@@Zifiron the nikon versions are that much better in your opinion?
@@breylankemp7596 Not in my opinion. I'm a full time professional. I used the Tamron G2 to my satisfaction for over a year before my serious work. I then switched to the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8E about 1.5 years ago. I'll tell you: there's no better F mount version available than that one. I use it on a D500 and a Z6II + FTZ. The only lens better than that E-version is the S-line version for the Z-mount.
Feel free to check out my work at www.tpjverhoeven-photography.com
@@Zifiron thank you for the response I usually lean towards the tamrons I've had the gen 1 70-200mm f2.8 for 6 plus years and it's as sharp as ever need to upgrade to the g2 tho.
You guys should contact Sigma and see if that was a broken unit. Damn, that was horrible IS/VR.
There in lies the problem: Sigma quality and consistency should perhaps be better: they shouldn't be shipping faulty lenses!
I agree. And it's a shame because I've used the Sigma ART 35mm a few times (borrowed) and it seemed great.
I own a Sigma lens with OS and when I first got it I recall the instructions stating that the OS doesn't work that quickly to just switch on. I believe it was recommended once switching on you had to wait about a minute for it too kick in after half depressing the shutter but I guess it could also had been defective.
Theres no doubt the Sigma was a faulty lens , every company ships a bum lens every now and then
true that. Sigma OS is in standby when turned off until you activate af
What about bokeh, chromatic and coma aberration, flare and ghosting, distortion etc. ? There's a lot more that goes into a lens optical characteristic than "how sharp it is".
They need to have a parallel comparison to other facories... Nikon 2470s has been the least sharp of their class but everybody just praise on
How about *actual build quality, I,m talking about quality of internal construction...what grade of aluminum and plastic? How well are the focus motors built? How precise is the machining? know you can’t tell that just by looking at the lens. Will the lenses stand up to hard use over a long time? It has been my experience that Nikon will definitely hold up. The Tamron and Sigma used to be junk lenses. I’m not saying they still are but no one has proven they are just as good as Nikon yet.
‘Cave Beast Demon' the Tamron does come with a 6 year warranty which is a plus.
As usual fstoppers is a poor excuse for journalism.
@@cavebeastdemon3631 the art series and g2 series are solid, as is the native glass from sony, canon, and nikon. photographers like to flick their lenses and complain about how plasticy it is, and then pull out their precision steel dumbells machined in germany in the 80s to show what "real" lenses are suppose to be like. there hasnt been any major recall on any of the latest generation of lenses.
Sigma = not weather sealed. Tamron = thoroughly gasketed and sealed throughout.
Tamron = better constructed. Period.
And don't forget the TAP-In Console allows for profiling: optimize the VC for video, change the manual focus override attenuation to rack slower or faster. Save the video profile for later. Another advantage.
Does it have IS?
@@miguelcallejas5323 VC (Vibration Compensation is What Tamron calls it so yes
The sigma is weather sealed, what are you on about link: cameradecision.com/lenses/faq/is-the-Sigma-24-70mm-F2.8-DG-OS-HSM-Art-Canon-EF-a-Weather-Sealed-lens
I've had the "G1" tamron until it broke from a hard fall...
The G2 version looks nicer and noticed some other minor improvements.
Tamron is doing quite well..
Regarding the studio color test, I think there could be another explanation: I think the Nikon isn't more "telephoto" as you're saying, but the Tamron and Sigma both have severe focus breathing. The first generation Tamron had the same problem and I read a test that the G2 has even more problems with focus breathing. Try shooting a landscape on 70mm with these three lenses and they will probably look the same. But when you're shooting an object at close distance the Tamron and Sigma probably aren't 70mm anymore.
I know this video is dated by two years but I own the Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 , and the Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 , using them on Nikon D7100, D7200, D750 and a D810. The reviews here are great and I would agree, but in my eyes, hands down, the Tamron versions are the best bang for the buck. I shoot fashion, real estates and some landscape. Absolutely love them and while I did my own reviews as well, the Sigmas were not even in the running or an option for me. As far as Nikon, the reviews here are accurate but no need to spend or waste extra money on for the brand name "Nikon" printed on the lenses.
is there a large difference between the older tamron and newer one?
Bought the Tamron 24-70mm G2 its fantastic
Thanks, i am getting one for the holidays, was on the fence, but so many people are praising the tamron for value and goodness for 99% of photos, Have the 70-200 already..
The title of this video should be "The Best 24-70mm f2.8 Lens You Can Buy for NIKON"
Though I agree (and I was looking the info for canon) the comparisons made in the video are universal when it comes to sigma and tamron.
🤭
No Sony G-Master, no Canon L...
Totally agree!
The biggest worry with aftermarket lenses is always focus accuracy but you didn't cover that. Can you comment on focusing please?
I bought the Tamron 24-70mm G2 and had focus problems with my D800. Sent the D800 and lens to Tamron fo calibration. Camera and lens came back working great.
i'm currently calibrating my lens as I write theses lines. PAIN IN THE *SS...
I will get the Nikon 24-70 anytime though it is the most expensive one of the three and bigger. Optics and image quality over the other two. And it zoom is internal so will not suck in air while you zoom. Which means the lens is less likely to grow fungus and trap moisture within. This is through experience. Here in my country Singapore hot and humid all year round - my Nikon 85mm prime macro and 50mm prime G never get any fungus, while all my other zooms (no matter the brand) now has traces of fungus in the lens. Maintenance, cleaning and even replacements of affected lens cost more over time than a single purchase.
Comeon Fstoppers more content like this .. don't let photography related channels die
as if they were gonna anyway
It is a pity an AF speed and accuracy test wasn't done. That is the area the Nikon should be streaks ahead of the other 2 lenses but it would have been nice to see the comparison.
yes that what he should had done
Don't underestimatie the AF speed of modern Sigma lenses. Many times they are as fast as Nikon en Canon counterparts. Sometimes they are even faster (Sigma 135/1.8 is very fast and also the 85Art is faster than the competition).
The Nikkor 27-70mm f/2.8 VR has Nikons latest version of their silent wave motor, which is meant to be exceptionally fast and accurate.
Sigma's can be very hit and miss when it comes to autofocus, with a lot of people complaining that they have had issues gaining accurate focus, though it can be improved dramatically when calibrated using Sigmas docking station. My former assistant has the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 art and it is a good lens but I didn't find the AF particularly stood out against the competition (though it does focus faster than my Zeiss 85mm Milvus :P).
The Nikon version (unfortunately) is far better in AF speed. I hate this lens for its ugly bokeh and distortion, but it is indeed the fastest even compared to its previous predecessor.
Hahah if u are happy to pay extra 1000$ more
There is not necessarily anything wrong with the Sigma IS. It might be that, by default, the IS only kicks in when you take a picture (that's the case on my Sigma 150-600). On that lens it can be changed by using the dock.
Thats what I thought, but it means it is worthless for video.
I was planning on buying the Sigma (Which looks stylish to me and the other ART series lenses are awseome) but watching this video I'm definately buying the Tamron because I mostly do videos and I'll be needing a good VC/OS/VR. Thanks a lot Mr. Morris (and @Fstoppers) for this awesome in-depth honest review
The Nikon’s VR looks fantastic. My guess is the reason it’s like that when you break away is due to panning. I bet they purposely worked it in there like that, especially since it looked like only the horizontal axis was allowed to move and the vertical axis was still locked. Good video, really clears it up and makes the decision easy.
Sounds like you had it on sport. Where it adapts to allow panning.
Shocked by the Sigma IS haha
i bet he didn't use the usb dock and update it
To be honest, that should not matter. It should be way better out of the box.
I'm also very surprise by the result of Stabilization of the Sigma... perhaps a bad sample... but Really thanks for this test;.... very informative.
More Sigma lenses have problems with working stabilisation on Nikon cameras.
Nice review. Is it possible to add Pentax k1 and 24-70 lens? Regards
I think the IS on Sigma wasn't working at all. Maybe it doesn't work on video, it just tries to compensate stills.
Also, if I recall it right, Nikon fixed focus breathing issues on their new lenses. So the focal length was right on Nikon and wider than it should on other two. Both of those test shots were at quite short distance. Fixing focus breathing also makes lenses longer, which would explain Nikon lens size too.
My opinion is that the reason you buy and F/2.8 is to have the ability to shoot sharper images in low light situations at f/2.8. For this reason alone I would have to go with the Nikon. The Tamron is greater than the Nikon at f/8 and at VR or VR, but if that's the case then you may as well just get a nice kit lens with VC or VR and shoot at f3.5 and up. If the lens you buy is a constant f2.8 then it should perform excellent at f2.8:) I'm only speaking in terms of this lens shootout and deciding which one to buy. Great comparison video though!
I couldn't care less how my lens looks like. All I care about is how well they work for me. Nikon is a great lens. Sigma has some stabilisation problems. I haven't tried Tamron yet but I guess I'll go with Nikon. Good video. Well explained.
I wouldn't have picked the way the lens looks (gold vs silver) as my first criteria in this review.
Yeah, I thought that was an odd choice, especially since since it's so subjective. I for one prefer black and gold. It's a signature look.
Concerning the optical stabilization on the Sigma, I just bought one a week ago and happened across this video. The possibility of it being no good at that feature concerned me (not a lot, but some...). I just did a quick, similar test (only the Sigma, don't have the other two lenses) at 70mm and using the video feature (Nikon D750). I appear to get the same results as Fstoppers; no significant change between the OS being turned on or off, whether I was holding the camera steady (handheld) or purposefully shaking it. That said, I didn't think there was that much shake in the image to begin with (at 70mm), at least while I was standing still. Seemed like the posted video could have been held better, but he was consistent throughout the 3 lenses.
But I'm more concerned with how the stabilization works with STILL photography, which is what I would use it for 95% of the time anyway. Testing for that, I sat in my office chair, zoomed to 70mm, focused on some cabinet knobs about 18-20 foot away. I tried a test, on Manual, at 1/30s, f/4.5, and then 1/15s, f/6.3, shooting 4 consecutive frames each with and w/o the OS turned on. CONSISTENTLY I had motion blur when I zoomed into the center of my image NOT using the OS, some worse than others, especially at 1/15s. AND consistently I had almost identically sharp, at least MUCH sharper, images when the OS was turned on. There was a marked difference. So the OS on the SIGMA may indeed suck for video shooting however I found it a worthwhile feature for still imagery.
Note, most of my lenses are Nikon, always just wanting to buy the "brand" name since I didn't trust competitors. However I think my old mindset of what those competitors were like in decades past is quite outdated. Nikon (and Canon) have serious competition out there for both IQ and pricing. I bought a used Tamron 90mm macro a year ago and, especially for the $400 price, have been blown away by it's image quality. I still love Nikon, but they need to be more competitive in their pricing in my opinion or suffer more losses in their market share.
Thanks a lot for doing the test and posting the results. I was about to dismiss the Sigma.
In case you see this, could you share your long-term experience with the lens?
Just bought the Tamron 24-70mm G2.. Absolutely amazing chunk of glass.. Pair it with the Tamron 70-200mm and your camera kit will be complete!
Did you not test out the autofocus speeds?
I must say that the auto focus speed quite a big feature when it comes to lenses.
Precision might be even more interesting
“I really think this is the worst optical stabilization I have ever seen” haha I laughed! Wow! Thanks for doing these tests!
A great review! I have bought tamron 70-200 and it’s actually a very descent lens, I’m happy enough with it. Now can see its little brother 24-70 totally worth the G2 generation, very well done tamron
i have both copies for my canon 6d mk ii and still am a happy puppy .
Thank you for that VC test. I sent a lens back specifically FOR this reason, in exchange for the version with the VC. My fears have been validated with the shake test.
Cost me 200 bucks more, but totally worth it.
Very few people know this but Sigma release an firmware update last year for the 24-70 Art that correct the performance of the OS. Before the update, the OS only kicks in when the shot was taken, to preserve battery I guess. But after the update, the OS will keep on going when you compose the shot or half press shutter. That's why some other CZcams review actually think the Sigma OS is better(because they compare the OS by the photo they took). Good for photo photographer, but bad for filmmaker. i had mine sent to the local store for firmware update, worked perfectly ever since.
So does it work good for video now ?
Wow. That was a great video. Thank you so much!
Thats what you call a SUPERB review!!! No waffle, just straight into it, answering all the questions that we all want to know! Cheers.
I'd like to provide some advice to anyone who watches this and is looking to buy a 24-70 for nikon. I went with this reviews recommendation and bought the Tamron. It's worked decently well, but I have several complaints. The outside of the lens is horribly constructed, I have scrapes and marks all over the lens hood and lens body and have not been overly rough with it, it started getting scraped up the moment I took it out of the box. Even the section that zooms out got scuffed up just from zooming in and out. The focus out of box is something you should be very very wary of. Mine is off, I'm going through the process to try to fix the focus but I don't expect much improvement due to how inconsistent it can be. I've missed several shots in lighting situations that should be just fine just because the lens is not consistent or fast. Don't get me wrong, it is usable and gets decently close, but it was to the point of off where I thought sharpness just wasn't achievable in a camera until I got a nikon lens and shot with it. I took a shot with an 85mm 1.4 and I could see my reflection in the eye of my subject. I took a picture with the tamron and it's almost like there's gauze over the image. The focus ring is almost unusable to manually focus if needed as well, it's extremely thin and inconsistently loose or tight. The lens seems to be very dark, I don't have a number to quantify but I'd guess somewhere around a half stop to dark. That may not sound like a lot, but I shoot at night, indoor, and do astrophotography quite a bit and it's very very frustrating. The lens sits loose in the mount, not enough to make it fall out or anything crazy like that, but it's very noticeable. The front element attracts dust like crazy. The lens cap gets loose and squeaky after a week or two of use. The switches are not to be trusted, if you put this into your bag, make 100% sure the switches are where you want them when you take them out. Just now I went out to shoot and realized that my VC switch had been turned off the whole time.
In summation, this was my very first full frame lens. It's worked decently well, and I didn't understand what I was missing until I used a piece of nikon glass. It can get you started, but if you buy this lens do tamron'a autofocus fine tune the second you pull it out of the box. A lot of my early shots are just not sharp anywhere I want them to be, not enough for most people to notice but enough to effect image quality in my mind. I'm still going to use it, probably until I save enough to get the nikon 24-70 and maybe even after just for the form factor, but I'm not going to trust it and I'm not going to be using it nearly as much. If you need a 24-70, be wary. It'll work, but it's not fantastic and it's not something to rely on.
Found the Tokina 24-70 pro to be the sharpest of any of these and a most pleasant surprise in price!
What about autofocus speed and accuracy in low light?
Well, if the looks matter, I actually like the Nikon Gold/Black theme. But curious, which VR mode did you use on the Nikon 24-70? And, what about the low light and AF speed performance? Thanks!
I just prefer the Nikon for one reason. The barrel is protected by the hood. When zooming I just feel better protected against elements and don’t fear bumping into objects because it’s always the same size and I can’t understand why other manufacturers don’t see this.
This was super helpful, was considering the sigma, but after watching this vid, only gonna consider tamron and nikkor. IMO nikkor would be the winner here, but in terms of cost, efficiency and quality tamron wins
You forgot to do an AF Test on the lenses. I was waiting on that part actually.
Hey +Fstoppers - I'm not a Sigma fanboy by any means, but I've played with the 24-70 f/2.8 ART lens in-store and the OS functioned waaayyy better than your copy. Rather, my issues were with extremely poor sharpness across the frame wide open, and even poor corner sharpness at f/5.6. I have the 50-100 f/1.8 for my D500 and it performs quite well, but if shooting wide open, I typically have to fight off loads of chromatic aberration outside of the center of the frame.
For similar reasons to yours, I am fully in support of the Tamron G2 lenses. AF is quite fast and silent, images look wonderful (I can live with the "onion ring" effect on out of focus highlights), and the VC is incredible. Further, those lenses are lighter than their Nikon counterparts, and both the 24-70 f/2.8 G2 and 70-200 f/2.8 G2 can be had, with good UV filters, for the price of Nikon's 70-200 f/2.8E FL ED lens. Nikon's prices on their glass are ridiculous; I can live with a company name really close to a feminine hygiene product and a little bit of focus breathing for half the cost of name brand gear...
Lastly, Tamron's 85 f/1.8 with VC is mindblowingly good; it left me spitting mad for not picking one up when I had the money before. Were it a little less expensive, I'd go for it, but that 24-70 f/2.8 G2 will be mine first.
Nice review and thanks!
I remember this was the first Fstoppers video I watched. I've watched tons of reviews from different channels and I can say, this is one of the very few channels that produce objective honest reviews. If there's any channel I won't miss checking before buying, it would definitely be Fstoppers. More power to y'all!
I really like the gold on the Nikon lenses. To me, the all white lettering makes the lens look cheap. But, what do I know, I’m an old fogey that bought my first SLR (Nikon FE) in 1979. Great review and channel.
Tamron is the price point to match as this budget manufacturer has made incredible strides over the past 5 years in the sharpness and background bokeh (blur). I either own or shoot with every major lens out there. I do not have a problem revealing that Tamron lenses can give you the same results as shooting full frame using Sony sensors and Nikon glass. I shoot manual focus so the Tamron can still keep you honest--I get slightly less image stabilization. I use Tamron lenses strictly for portraiture. The cream in the background, the texture and every vein of the eyeballs and colors that actually pop and are never muddied are all screaming that this Tammy's for you!
When it comes to reliability, Nikon lenses consistently stand out. Their superior focus sets them apart from the competition, making them the go-to choice for many photographers. Think of Nikon as the Lexus and Toyota of the camera world-renowned for their dependability and precision. Canon, on the other hand, is akin to Honda and Acura-reliable and respected, but often not quite at the same pinnacle of performance as Nikon.
(1) Great review, tackling real usage issues (e.g. ergonomics).
(2) FOCUS BREATHING!!! The reason that you found the Nikon has more magnification than the other two at 70mm (at close distances) is that the Sigma and Tamron exhibit "focus breathing". That is, when you focus at infinity with lens set at 70mm, you get 70mm, BUT when you focus closer, you no longer get 70mm. You might get 55mm or even 50mm. This will not matter to many people but it might be a HUGE issue for an event photographer photographing people at 8 or 10 feet, for example. 70mm is already marginally long for complimentary compression on a face at half body and 50 or 55mm on a full frame sensor is not long enough for a complimentary half body portrait unless you step back and plan to crop. That is, to use the Tamron or Sigma and get complimentary portraits, you will need to step back, plan to crop and lose some resolution. Not a disaster, not by a long shot, but it's a workflow complication in both shooting and in editing.
(3) Agree about black/silver being sharper look than Nikon gold.
(4) Tamron being "loose zoom" could mean focal length slippage when you hold camera by your side.
(5) Video stabilization test is jaw dropping.
(6) You might want to add a video testing focus speed, focus reliability, and perhaps tracking in continuous mode.
Overall this is a very unusually well done video test, and time efficient too.
Thanks!
Very beautiful Voice young lady! It was one of my favorites song! Merry Christmas to the two of you and your family's!!!
Merry Christmas to you too :)
you left out the MOST IMPORTANT test.
whos got FASTEST and Sharpest AUTO-FOCUS!
Canon. ='D
There is another video that tests this. Tamron's autofocus from one end to infinity is near instant. Sigma's is a slight slower. I honestly don't know about the Nikon.
The Sigma is SIGNIFICANTLY less sharp on the edges, if I buy a 2.8 lens I want to use it at 2.8.
I always put my subjects in the corner.
@@villageblunder4787 HAHAHA
@@villageblunder4787 I know your comment is an old joke, but corner sharpness performance is actually important for landscapes.
@@villageblunder4787 LMFAO! Bruh 😂😂😂
Tamron rocks. Have over 5 of their lenses and never fail me at weddings and sessions. Love them!
The vr in the tamron kept jerking even when you never shook it, the Nikon was smooth. Also i give alot of weight to the Nikon for no focus breathing, which you didn't really touch on.
I think the reason you say the nikon is more telephoto is simply because the lens is built to reduce "focus breathing" where when you focus to a subject closely the actual fov get wider if it's not corrected. Nikon 24-70 and 70-200 are built to reduce this as much as possible. I have a 70-200 mm where the 200 mm end become 135 mm when I focus closely where my old canon 70-200 mm would stay very close to 200 mm when use close to a subject.
For this reason if I was planning on doing portrait a lot with the 24-70 (I don't use a 24-70 for portrait personally) I would pay the price to get the nikon. Else the tamron is the best choice here. I have the pentax version of the tamron 24-70 mm and it's an incredible lens that doesn't leave the camera often. On ff sensor a good 24-70 mm f2.8 is a must.
I’m a Canon shooter and I have the previous version of the Tamron and I can honestly say it’s a brilliant lens.
Thank you for this video I am currently considering all three of these lenses on the used market!
Great review for me at exactly the right time so thanks for a warts and all review - I've just oredred the Tamron and looking forward to getting to use it !
I would rather you chose the lense with the greatest functionality rather than its look.
What difference does the trim make?
You did a review on a Tamron 24-70 a couple years back when I was considering buying the Canon 24-70. I was sold on the vibration stabilization aspect of that lens, and how you said you used it for (what did you call it, Fusion?) mixing video and still in your wedding photography. I used it a lot in a wedding I shot, and the stabilization was so good, i was able to follow the bride down a staircase with a very smooth video.... not to mention how you can shoot at some very ridiculously slow speeds in low light and have amazingly sharp images. Thank you Fstoppers, you guys have been an inspiration all the way for me.
Did you use ACTIVE VR on the Nikon, and not just NORMAL?
First time watching this channel and I'm impressed how he reviews gear. New subscriber
DxOMark chose the Tokina 24-70 as the best lens in this category over these. The test I saw was on a Nikon; you would have to check if they also tested it on a Canon.
would love to see how the contrast holds up hiting direct light/sun
Would’ve liked to see an autofocus test for them
The optical stabilization is activated when you starts focusing, it propably does when filming too
The Tamron is easily the best value here all things considered
All things... the stabilization for video was really bad.
@@davidgamboa4053 The test showed the Tamron's stabilisation was the best.
I've just purchased a Tamron one... so, I'm satisfied. I've yet experimented the Tamron Vc on the 150-600, and it is just amazing !
Sony 24-70/2.8 G master, the canon 24-70/2.8 II and the Tamron 24-70/2.8 G2. Buy which you can afford.
Mikeybikey88 you’re absolutely right! Have of these test, the client can’t tell the difference.
Thank you for the the fantastic review and comparison; must say, it is one of the best. I like how you're not bias in anyway and that's what I like to see in a comparison review. Once again, thank you and you've made my choice of choosing the lens that much easier. I like to go with the Nikon but the price is just insane and I'm no pro, just a hobbyist.
I just bought a Tamron and I wanted to know more about this lens. The tutorial really helps!
Thanks!
Nikon lens best. also the vr. nobody is shaking as hard as you, and Nikon lens breaking vr with shake is just because due to the hard shake the internal mechanism reached its maximum length of movement by trying to compensate the shake, so you just start dragging the vr. Nikons vr is working excellent
Very good review, but I have heard that people have run into auto focus problems (compatibility) with the off brands of lenses. Is that true in your experience ?
Wow! TAMRON is the new king! I just wish they added how fast these lens can focus on a subject.
Nothing beats Canon’s 24-70. Still the industry standard.
When did the Canon’s 24-70 get IS? wait it does not have it...
industry standard doesn't make something good. there are many products that are much higher rated and performing than industry standards in all fields. but sure, canon's lens, which is a great lens, is industry standard. according to you.
What's interesting is the different color rendition and the brightness in different shots.
What microphone are you using Lee? Sounds great
I've got Nikkor 24-70 non-VR. I've been using it for years now. Aside from new VR version, I believe it's the sharpest 24-70 lens you can get for your Nikon csmeras. However, mine is starting to show some signs of aging. Still works well though but feels like its time is coming. When it breaks, I probably won't pay high Nikon repair costs. Most likely I'll just get the new Tamron.
Sitti2300 I am thinking about getting the 24-70 VR is it worth it? Are you sure the non-vr is sharper? I would really reconsider if that's the case
Vesh Jay only slighty sharper at certain focal length. I would still get new 24 70 VR if I were you.
Tammy G2 it is. My G1 was slow and fennicky but sharp as needed. The G1 70-200 is still my favorite lens. Looking forward to the improvements. Nikon is almost offensive with their price premium nowadays. There is just no justification for 2x the money the last 5 years.
I use the Tamron on my Canon EOS cameras andI love it! Thanksfor your test!
I've just bought a D850. Already have the old school Nikon 35-70 F2.8 AF D. Ken Rockwell and the "angry guy" both rave about this lens. Looking forward to using it.
Great video. The only thing I don't like about the Tamron lens is that the body moves in and out as you zoom.
Diminishing returns. The Nikon will be the best in a few areas but it will cost more for a very small advantage.
Ever try to get a repair on a ten year old Tamron lens? Didn't think so.
My Canon 24-70mm f2.8 failed (connection error). Canon wanted $450 to repair. Instead, I replaced it with Tamron's G2. I did the research and the G2 does really well. So the deciding factor was a Tamron 6 year warranty! I saved $500 on less expensive Tamron G2 and got a 6 year warranty (peace of mind).
i really dont care about how the lens looks
Exactly, that should have been thrown in at the end or something. Frustrating.
The optical stabilization in my sigma 18-200 f3.5-6.3 is just good enough to ruin a long exposure.
My Tamron 70-200 f2.8 g1 is a phenomenal lens. Bought it grey market for $900, and not one single problem in over two years and thousands of shots. Only complaints are minimum focus distance and its inability to select focus range, as it can blow out the entire image into mad bokeh at 200mm close focus (something you'd want to limit it to close focus)
Nobody ever stops down a 24-70 you only buy it to shoot it wide open, the reality is that with exceptions it is always better to buy a good used Nikon than a new third party lens. You are on your own 2 years from now with them.
I remember the tamron comes with a 5 years service warranty for these new lenses, i just dont know with sigma.
I own the Nikon and it is a MONSTER! in both senses of the word. It takes awesome photos but it is huge compared to its predecessor and difficult to maneuver in crowds.
Tamron lenses are great. I have both the 24-70 and 70-200, older versions. The only problem if you are a Nikon user is if you have more than one Tamron lens and the focus is off. It might only be a problem with older Nikon bodies, I have a D700, but both my lens are off by an inch in opposite directions and my d700 can't tell the difference on which Tamron lens is attached to the camera so I have to manually adjust the AF fine tune each time I switch lens. Anyone know if this is still a problem? I've switched to Sony so I don't really deal with it anymore but I still have my Nikon set up as a backup camera.
Based on this review I bought the Tamron 24-70 on Amazon. I kept it for a few months without really using it much until I went on vacation in Tenerife. I use it mostly for landscape with a tripod. This lens sucks big time! The images I was getting were blurry at certain focal lengths with the best weather possible for landscape and the autofocus switch kept on switching off while moving the camera. At some point I had back and front focus issue to the point where it really frustrated me. I tried to calibrated on my Nikon D850 but nothing worked. When I got back home I bought the Tap In console from Tamron and wasted a whole Saturday trying to calibrate the lens without any success. Finally I gave up and contacted Amazon who were kind enough to give my money back. Trying to spare money on cheaper lenses it's not worth it. I'll have to go with the original Nikon 24-70 even though it's more expensive. Note: I still got some great images but overall experience I was disappointed.
Hello George.
I also use a D850 with the Tamron G2 24-70 and, to my idea, it is the best zoom I've ever had. Perhaps yours was defective, I don't know, but mine is incredible even at 1200%. Believe me.
And that, before using the Tap in console.
Misteries of life...
I've got the Tamron 24-70 G2 and its just downright amazing.
Great review! I totally agree with your conclusion. I was one of those who believed I had to stick with Nikon lenses to get good quality. But after much research, I bought the Tamron and am very happy with it. 📷
cameraz99 I was thinking about the Nikon, how is the AF test on the Tamron tho? Isn't Nikon a lot faster and what about low light situations? Is it good? Focus hunting?
I only have the Nikon 24-120mm f4 to compare it to, but I'd say that this Nikon lens is a little sharper than the Tamron 24-70mm f2.8. Both seem to focus equally well in low light, but here again, the Nikon focuses a little faster -- but not enough to make a difference, IMO.
I had a Sigma 50-500mm once, and had similar experience with the OS, but it kind of activated when l start focusing. Then it worked great
I just subscribed because we need more honest reviews from people like you.
Forget Sigma and Tamron on a Nikon body. The Nkon body will not do lens correction on 3rd party lenses.