This isn’t a Nikon only migration. One of my good friends bought a couple of Canon 1DX cameras and ended up swapping out his f/2.8 zooms for the Canon 17-40mm f/4L, 24-105mm f/4L, and a 70-200mm f/4L. I think there’s a reason why we’re starting to see many lens manufacturers making constant f/4 zoom lenses; the need for faster zooms is as The one thing that annoys me about 24-70 lenses though, is that 70mm is just not in the sweet spot for a traditional portrait focal length. I just wish lens designers would push a little longer to 24-85mm whilst maintaining f2.8. On that basis, I'd go for the Sony, which at 105mm f4 would give similar equivalence as 85mm at f2.8. Den Overall in comparison to the Canon f2.8 II, the Canon 24-70 f4 IS has a weakness at 50mm that is well documented by The Digital Picture, Lenstip, LensRentals and DxOMark. However, I have not seen any actual user complaints. The Tamron is weakest at f2.8 in the 50-70mm range. Also well documented. Now the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8E VR is as sharp in the center and significantly better everywhere else at f/2.8, and once stopped down to f/5.6, it takes off big time without letting the Tamron catch up. Overall, it is pretty clear that the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8E VR is a much better lens sharpness-wise when compared to the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC. The first telephoto lens of choice, especially recommended for beginners, is the 135mm F2.5 SMC Pentax. This lens has the Pentax K bayonet mount, and requires the K-EOS adapter for attachment to Canon EOS cameras. When the aperture is stopped down to 37mm using step-down filter rings, this lens produces incredibly tiny pinpoint star images from If one seems more suitable for your use then thats the one to get. The 16-35 F4 is a very nice lens though, it has a very nice contrast and colour reproduction. Id put in in the same league as the 24-70 f/2.8 mkii. For what its worth i love my EF-S 10-18 on my 80D, and feel the 16-35 f/4 IS does the same job on my 5D4. yFs7. Compared to pro F2.8 lenses. Measured with Canon and Sony mirrorless options, F4 zoom lenses are on average 57% lighter, 25% shorter and 44% less money than the comparable F2.8 lens. A multiple exposure image to show the size difference between the Canon RF 24-70mm F2.8 and the Canon RF 24-105mm F4. Every camera system must offer a collection The Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD (Model A007) was announced in February 2012, just one day before the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM. Its headline feature is indicated by the 'VC' in its name, which stands for 'Vibration Control'; it's the first and only optically-stabilized fast normal zoom for full frame cameras. As befits a premium SLR lens it also includes an ultrasonic-type autofocus The 24-70 is an architecture/landscape and indoor event lens. The 24-105 is a street photography and outdoor event lens. Both are excellent, but both are full-frame lenses that will be annoyingly long on an 80D. For your purposes, take Scott's advice and get the 17-55 f/2.8. The lens supports electronic aperture control on compatible Nikon cameras and can be used with Tamron's TAP-in Console dock for updating firmware and fine-tuning AF and Vibration Correction. The Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 G2 will ship in August for Nikon F-mount and September for Canon EF. It will be priced at $1199 for both mounts. When I was shooting with my old 7D and a Sigma 70-200 2.8, I used 4, 4.5 and 5, 5.6 and 6.3 all the time without any problems. A friend of mine who's used both these lens told me the f4 is tack sharp, better than the 2.8. Thanks for any input you might have. I don't know that the f4 is better than the 2.8 really. The new 24-70 II is 24.8 oz (805g) versus 23.6 oz (670g) of the 24-105. Previous 24-70 f/2.8 users will appreciate the drastic reduction in weight, the shorter length and the smaller hood. Those coming over from Nikon now have a 24-70 f/2.8 with the sharpness that they were used on the Nikon platform in a lighter weight lens.

canon 24 70 f4 vs f2 8