jam Loc: Beaufort, NC

I have ordered the 5d and I am looking at getting a 24-70 lens. I am trying to decide between the Canon 24-70 f4L IS USM and the Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 VC USD. Will the 5D the low light capabilities make up for the loss of several steps going with the canon? Both are about the same price. I have not used either of these lens or the 5d yet. Any help will be greatly appreciated.

AntonioReyna Loc: Los Angeles, California

I have had the 5DIII and the 24-70/2.8 Canon lens, so I assume that the 4.0 IS version will be comparable optically, although not as fast, although it is image stabilized. With the high ISO on the 5DIII and the newer cameras, you don't need the 2.8 speed, so I would recommend the Canon lens, which has very nice reviews.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Generally speaking gathering more light through the lens is always preferred to increasing the ISO and possibly introducing noise into the image. Obviously a 5DIII will allow you to use a much higher ISO setting than most other bodies while keeping the noise level lower. But make no mistake about it, raising ISO to high levels will always introduce some noise. With regard to your statement about losing several stops if you go with the f/4 Canon, that is incorrect. The difference between f/2.8 and f/4 is only one stop. You are probably thinking of the 1/3 stop increments of f/2.8, f/3.2, f/3.5, and f/4. What the Tamron at f/2.8 will allow you to do, besides gathering double the light of the Canon when used wide open, is to capture a shallower depth of field. Only you can decide if its worth it to you. The Tamron is highly rated but I have no personal experience with either lens. All lens/camera combinations involve some compromise. Only you can really say which of those compromises you can live with. I would suggest you read all the online reviews of both lenses and their capabilities. Compare build, image quality (especially when wide open), AF accuracy, IS vs VC capability, etc. The reviews can be very enlightening.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

I agree with this 100%.
I would not use my body to make up for the lens, but unfortunately we have financial limits as well. We do what we have to do.
But no F4 lens was designed to be used primarily for low light shooting. That's why on the 8th day, primes were invented, for speed.
For low light, faster is always better!! If you have an F4, you should also have a fast prime to go with it. After all, 2.8 is no fire breathing dragon either. Also look into a 50 1.4 or an 85 1.8 etc.
Good luck
SS

jam Loc: Beaufort, NC

jam Loc: Beaufort, NC

Thanks to everyone for your replies. I already have the following Canon lens:
50 1.4, 85 1.8, 70-200 2.8 IS and 300 F4. Thank you for your help

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

The Tamron has gotten great reviews. Go to YouTube and find That Nikon Guy. He did a comparison of 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses, and the Tamron was very impressive - the only one with VR. It's currently selling for about $1,200.

TimS Loc: GA

I'd get the tamron and use the AF micro adjust to dial it in perfctly :). Do to forget the 2.8 will autofocus better, more accurately, and faster in low light than a 4.0.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Right. People get hung up on brand name and ignore performance and price.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Based on what I've been reading about the Tamron, I would be leaning towards it as well.

mikegreenwald Loc: Illinois

Well said. You should read this posting twice.

Cappy Loc: Wildwood, NJ

Very good comment. Life is full of compromises, especially lens purchases & camera bodies (FF vs crop, brand, etc.), $$ etc.

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

Stick with Canon lenses. You won't be disappointed. I've read too many issues about 3rd party lenses. Just google them and see.

amehta Loc: Boston

Since you've already got the 50mm f/1.4 and the 70-200mm f/2.8, you could get a 24mm lens and have the range covered. You already see the benefit of primes. :-)

BigBear Loc: Northern CT

Look at the 24-105 f/4 with IS.
I love the quality I get with several different bodies.