Canon 24-70/4.0 L vs. Tamron 28-75/2.8 vs. Canon 16-35/4.0 L

Canon 24-70/4.0 L vs. Tamron 28-75/2.8 vs. Canon 16-35/4.0 L probably is a little bit unfair, and taken the very good 16-35/4.0 L IS into the comparism doens’t make it better 😉

Canon 24-70/4.0 L vs. Tamron 28-75/2.8 vs. Canon 16-35/4.0 LIn my Last week review  24/2015 i posted that i got myself a Canon 24-70/4.0 L IS because of the Canon summer cashback i couldn’t resist 😉 and substituted my  Tamron 28-27/2.8 before my vacation to  Rügen . Looking at the resulting images i was thrilled about the optical performance of  Canon 24-70/4.0 L IS . But anyway i was interested comparing this lens with the Tamron and since i got Canon 16-35/4.0 L IS within the cashback offer. So it was quite obvious to take this into the comparism too, at least for the lower focal range.

The Tamron 2.8/28-75,mm was long my standard zoom on the 5D MK II,even though i already bought the lens, when i owned the Canon 40D.

I did the comparism with the 3 lenses (a comparism with the Canon 17-40/4.0 would have been interesting, but i already sold it), here are the images

Canon 24-70/4.0 L vs. Tamron 28-75/2.8 vs. Canon 16-35/4.0 L.
Center top Tamron 2.8/28-75 middle Canon 24-70/4.0 bottom 16-35/4.0 @28mm

At fully open aparture the Tamron is pretty good, gets even better stepping down to f 4.0, but doesn’t reach the optical perfomance of the two Canon L lenses. Both are at fully open aparture more crisp, but lets be fair, we’re talking almost 3 times the price of the Tamron.

Canon 24-70/4.0 L vs. Tamron 28-75/2.8 vs. Canon 16-35/4.0 L
Corner top Tamron 2.8/28-75 middle Canon 24-70/4.0 bottom 16-35/4.0 @28mm

The corners are a little bit soft with the Tamron lens, you can improve it by stepping down the aparture a little bit. Both the 24-70 and the 16-35 lenses are better (should i say of course), even though too me the 16-35 is alittle bit better.

Canon 24-70/4.0 L vs. Tamron 28-75/2.8 vs. Canon 16-35/4.0 L
Center top Tamron 2.8/28-75 middle Canon 24-70/4.0 bottom 16-35/4.0 @35mm

Almost the same picture at a focal lenght of 35mm. The differences between the lenses are getting smaller.

Canon 24-70/4.0 L vs. Tamron 28-75/2.8 vs. Canon 16-35/4.0 L
Corner top Tamron 2.8/28-75 middle Canon 24-70/4.0 bottom 16-35/4.0 @35mm

Looking at the corners the Tamron lens is behind even at f 5.6, while the 24-70/4.0 and 16-35/4.0 are equal. But this is critisim on a very high level.

At last we looking at the results for a focal length of 70mmUnd dann schauen wir zum Schluss noch den Vergleich bei 70mm an:

Canon 24-70/4.0 L vs. Tamron 28-75/2.8 vs. Canon 16-35/4.0 L
Center top Tamron 2.8/28-75 bottom Canon 24-70/4.0 @70mm

Here of course the Canon 24-70/4.0 L IS make sthe frist place, but the differences  marginal.

Canon 24-70/4.0 L vs. Tamron 28-75/2.8 vs. Canon 16-35/4.0 L
Corner top Tamron 2.8/28-75 bottom Canon 24-70/4.0 @70mm

All images can be downloaded in full size, so you can make your own decision. But take into considaeration that the Tamron 2.8/28-75mm is a very good lens for the price.

I did expect the result so there are no surprises, because the Canon lenses are almost 2 1/2 times more expensive compared to the Tamron.

As soo i a get more experience with the macro mode of the Canon 24-70/4.0 L lens i might make a comparism with the 100mm/2.8 L IS Macro 😉

What do think , made similar experiences? Just let me know in the comments and i’m looking forward to your questions.

ciao tuxoche

 

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *