Tamron 70-200f2.8

[Dangermouse1964]

Unbiased opinons wanted on this lens as I have just paid £434 for a new one inc next day delivery.
I have heard its slow and has focussing issues in loads of places and also its not slow and has no focussing issues in others, so are the optics really better than Sigma, is it slower than sigma for fast focussing does it hunt????

All answers apreciated:thumbs:

[puddleduck]

I had one, yes the focusing is slow. I found is very accurate though, absolutely spot on from 70mm through to 200mm.

The optics are superb. Better than Sigma? I reckon so.

I think you'll like the lens, although Tamron needs a motor with more mojo for these bigs lenses - its basically inadequate to move that amount of lovely (but heavy) glass around.

I found a workaround was to shoot in AF-C to avoid the lens going on a big old hunt if AF missed.

[MJ Stebbings]

I like mine, focusing isnt as fast as it could be and i have had nothing of this size to compare against from other brands.
Is it sharp, i think it really is!

What stuff will you be shooting Dangermouse?

[whitey]

let me know how you get on, would be nice to do some comparisons with the sigma

[viper_biker]

Where did you get it for £434 DM? I've just came from looking at these on e-Bay... the C/C is getting the evil eye...

(or do I face the wrath of the missus and just blow the lot on the VR...)

[PsiFox]

Where did you get it for £434 DM? I've just came from looking at these on e-Bay... the C/C is getting the evil eye...

(or do I face the wrath of the missus and just blow the lot on the VR...)

I am given to understand that the VR will rise in price again wef 01/03/09.

[Dangermouse1964]

I bought it from camerabox after seeing it on the web ranging from 600 to 700 so just had to buy it lol

[Dangermouse1964]

Heres the link and yes they did sell rather fast at this price but we have been told they are getting more stock but wouldnt specify a price

http://www.camerabox.co.uk/productDA1.asp?ProductName=Tamron-70-200mm-F2.8-Di-LD-(IF)-(Nikon-Motorised-Fit)&ProductID=5033

[Dangermouse1964]

let me know how you get on, would be nice to do some comparisons with the sigma

Will do a comparison later Steve see which comes top:thumbs:

[puddleduck]

I got mine for £375, prices have gone up a bit.

Optically its probably in the £700-£1k price ballpark.

[viper_biker]

Looks like Warehouse Express have a few at the £470 mark for Nikon (or £430 for Canon)... mmmmm... Pay-day on Monday.

[Dangermouse1964]

Here some more cheap too

http://www.cliftoncameras.co.uk/Tamron_70-200_mm_F2.8_Di_LD_(IF)_MACRO

[puddleduck]

I am given to understand that the VR will rise in price again wef 01/03/09.

£1800 from March 1st.

Absolutely insane.

[viper_biker]

£1800 from March 1st.

Absolutely insane.

At that price I'll make my 70-300VR do a better job. That's some price, twice what they were retailing for last year.

[Dangermouse1964]

Its here and after a very quick play I can honestly say ...yes it is sharper than the sigma the optics are simply superb and as for the slow focussing it doesnt really seem slow to me heres a quick test shot handheld about 3ft away nothing done to it whatsoever only a resize the focus is on the A

http://i529.photobucket.com/albums/dd340/dangermouse1964/_DSC0003-3.jpg

[viper_biker]

Ever the more tempting now. OK, a/f is good at static object, what about moving ones, like motorbikes I wonder...

[Dangermouse1964]

Ever the more tempting now. OK, a/f is good at static object, what about moving ones, like motorbikes I wonder...

Will be doing a proper test this weekend at the planes so will post some up:thumbs:

[andy_fozzy]

WAHEEEY!!!

:woot:

[Dangermouse1964]

WAHEEEY!!!

:woot:

Early bird lol

[andy_fozzy]

Early bird lol

:lol:

Guess who's gonna catch the first worm :D

[puddleduck]

Its here and after a very quick play I can honestly say ...yes it is sharper than the sigma the optics are simply superb and as for the slow focussing it doesnt really seem slow to me heres a quick test shot handheld about 3ft away nothing done to it whatsoever only a resize the focus is on the A



The optics are definately better than the Sigma.

I am willing to go out on a limb and say this trounces the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS for wide open sharpness at 200mm, and is in the same ballpark as the Nikkor.

Easily £700-£1k optically. As for the slow focusing, shoot at macro distance, then re-focus on infinity - it'll be around 2 seconds from MFD to infinity.

I didn't keep it as I did find the slow focusing bothersome, but I would definately buy again if they remove the motor and go back to body driven AF.

[MJ Stebbings]

I'm with PD here, it really is quite slow, which is a shame because, as you say, it really is sharp. I did consider selling it the other day because of the slow focus, but the sharpness of lens is amazing for the £350 i paid for it and i dont use it enough to really worry about it.

[viper_biker]

Mike, wanna sell it to me ;)

[Dangermouse1964]

Well it dont seem to slow to me but it is slower than the sigma but not by much

[Dangermouse1964]

My next buy just has to be the 17-35f2.8 Tamron

[puddleduck]

My next buy just has to be the 17-35f2.8 Tamron

Thats excellent.

Body driven focusing too so its zippy.

[Dangermouse1964]

I'm with PD here, it really is quite slow, which is a shame because, as you say, it really is sharp. I did consider selling it the other day because of the slow focus, but the sharpness of lens is amazing for the £350 i paid for it and i dont use it enough to really worry about it.

Was it £350 new or s/h either way thats a bloody good price for one:thumbs:

[Dangermouse1964]

Took it out for a test run this morning and boy was I suprised with it, The focussing was pleasantly faster than I thought it would be and it never hunted once and once it locked ont the fast moving aircraft it just stayed in focus with no bother and the sharpness is so good, heres a test shot thats had a small crop and resize only cc on it is appreciated

http://i529.photobucket.com/albums/dd340/dangermouse1964/_DSC0048.jpg

Thanks

[nictry]

Are these the same? http://www.cliftoncameras.co.uk/Tamron_70-200_mm_F2.8_Di_LD_(IF)_MACRO and http://www.jacobsdigital.co.uk/index.php?target=products&product_id=16694

If so why £200 different???

[Dangermouse1964]

Yes Nictry the lenses are identical and I got mine from camera box £10 cheaper ...well worth 435

[viper_biker]

D/M, could you show me a few pics of the lense itself please. My mouse is hovering ove the 'Add To Basket' button LOL

[babytiger]

Viper
DMs just sorting out a couple for you now

[Dangermouse1964]

D/M, could you show me a few pics of the lense itself please. My mouse is hovering ove the 'Add To Basket' button LOL


Here ya go mate:thumbs:

http://i529.photobucket.com/albums/dd340/dangermouse1964/DSCF2285.jpg

http://i529.photobucket.com/albums/dd340/dangermouse1964/DSCF2287.jpg

[viper_biker]

Cool, thanks.

Erm... my finger slipped and I seem to have bought one too :D

Look forward to it arriving.

[Dangermouse1964]

Cool, thanks.

Erm... my finger slipped and I seem to have bought one too :D

Look forward to it arriving.

:lol::lol: explain this to the missus... well done they are just so sharp:clap:

[viper_biker]

Well, if there are no more posts from me after monday/tuesday you'll know she's not happy LOL

[Dangermouse1964]

Well, if there are no more posts from me after monday/tuesday you'll know she's not happy LOL

:lol::lol::lol: But you will be :thumbs:

[CSB]

I was really tempted by this and it would go nicely with my Tamron 17-50 f2.8 but the reviews I've read have slated its autofocus performance and highlighted a softness problem in the 135mm area.

Can anyone who is using this lens on a Canon body comment? Are these negatives being exaggerated or is that to be expected from a lens at this price?

Thanks in advance :)

[Dangermouse1964]

I was really tempted by this and it would go nicely with my Tamron 17-50 f2.8 but the reviews I've read have slated its autofocus performance and highlighted a softness problem in the 135mm area.

Can anyone who is using this lens on a Canon body comment? Are these negatives being exaggerated or is that to be expected from a lens at this price?

Thanks in advance :)

Obviously I cant say what its like in canon flavour but if its as good as nikon you dont need to worry about it, Yes its not as fast as a sigma for focussing but once its locked onto a moving subject it just comes into its own the focus becomes superb and never hunts and as for it being soft ....forget that its one of the sharpest lenses I know through the whole zoom range my sigma 70-200f2.8 couldnt manage what this tamron is capable of :thumbs:

[fontmoss]

my god, i think thatd be a nightmare on the wee d40 body, id have to lean backwards to counterbalance it!

[CSB]

Obviously I cant say what its like in canon flavour but if its as good as nikon you dont need to worry about it, Yes its not as fast as a sigma for focussing but once its locked onto a moving subject it just comes into its own the focus becomes superb and never hunts and as for it being soft ....forget that its one of the sharpest lenses I know through the whole zoom range my sigma 70-200f2.8 couldnt manage what this tamron is capable of :thumbs:

It may only be a Canon problem then, both the reviews I read were based on the Canon version & they both said the same thing :(

[Dangermouse1964]

my god, i think thatd be a nightmare on the wee d40 body, id have to lean backwards to counterbalance it!


Remember a third of the lens is only hood so the actual lengt is only about 7 and a bit inches long and its a little bit lighter than the sigma and nikon (not so much as you would notice):thumbs:

[viper_biker]

What size is the end of the lense? I'm guessing 77mm... always the way, my new 67mm UV won't fit it. I guess it's stay on the 70-300VR.

[Dangermouse1964]

What size is the end of the lense? I'm guessing 77mm... always the way, my new 67mm UV won't fit it. I guess it's stay on the 70-300VR.

yes 77mm :thumbs:

[ricky1980]

DM can you send some pictures to me to my personal email please? as i am also worried about the softness on the right hs from some reviews from the above posts...dpreview is one of them.

[nictry]

DM can you send some pictures to me to my personal email please? as i am also worried about the softness on the right hs from some reviews from the above posts...dpreview is one of them.

This one http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamron_70-200_2p8_c16/ although worth bearing in mind this was a Canon review model and it does seem to be the Canon variety that is slated for the softness issue

[Xup]

Here's one from the Sigma 70-200 2.8, on a
proper aircraft, not a granny craft ;)

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s223/xup11/Hawk02.jpg

[Barlines]

Here's one from the Sigma 70-200 2.8, on a
proper aircraft, not a granny craft ;)

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s223/xup11/Hawk02.jpg

I think with that thing bearing down on me, I'd have been too busy filling my pants to check my settings and press the shutter :eek:

[Dangermouse1964]

:lol:we all dont live in hills and shag sheep so we stick to what we have ....normal planes and women:lol::lol::lol:

[Dangermouse1964]

Here's one from the Sigma 70-200 2.8, on a
proper aircraft, not a granny craft ;)

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s223/xup11/Hawk02.jpg

Why is this soft

[Barlines]

Why is this soft

:thinking: I could shave with that image...

[Xup]

Why is this soft

Probably, as its a Sigma and its coming straight at me at close to 400MPH
+ the fact I was standing on one leg and waving like hell with my left arm :wave:, to make sure he saw me ;)

[Dangermouse1964]

Probably, as its a Sigma and its coming straight at me at close to 400MPH
+ the fact I was standing on one leg and waving like hell with my left arm :wave:, to make sure he saw me ;)


:lol::lol::lol: honestly mate its a cracker just wish we had them round here:clap::clap:

[Gary Coyle]

Here's one from the Sigma 70-200 2.8, on a
proper aircraft, not a granny craft ;)

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s223/xup11/Hawk02.jpg

Whooooo, where on earth were you stood to take that, how far above your head did it fly.

[Xup]

Whooooo, where on earth were you stood to take that, how far above your head did it fly.

CadWest in the Mach loop, Have a Look here from Last Friday, as the pics are 1000 wide, to big to post on here.

The Mach loop is just WOW for plane pics.

Enjoy :)

http://www.phpbber.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=4880&mforum=lowflynet

and

http://www.phpbber.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=4853&mforum=lowflynet

Martin

[larryslord]

Xup, those pictures are absolutely stunning even to my untrained eye.

Was this a special event or do you just know where the flight paths are & go along.

I wouldn't get any pictures of this quality but would be interested in giving it a go one day.

[aztec]

The price difference may be that one may be the MkII version ?

[aztec]

I am a bit confused a lot of people on this link have been giving it bad reviews may be its just on the 40D http://photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00PqrF

[Gary Coyle]

The 40d in itself can be a duffer camera, i had 3 before i managed to get one which was sharp

[Dangermouse1964]

CadWest in the Mach loop, Have a Look here from Last Friday, as the pics are 1000 wide, to big to post on here.

The Mach loop is just WOW for plane pics.

Enjoy :)

http://www.phpbber.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=4880&mforum=lowflynet

and

http://www.phpbber.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=4853&mforum=lowflynet

Martin


Wow those are superb love the Herc with one of the crew waving and the F15 with the backseater signalling you just awesome :thumbs:

[33L]

to my untrained eye the sigma looked sharper. im not saying that because i have one but would haved binned the tamron image. but the shutter speed vs focal length could introduce shake though.

[gembobs]

After reading about this lens on another forum, and also on here, I have taken the plunge and just ordered it from Warehouse express for £430. Can't wait to get it and play with it now!! :woot:

I was planning on getting the canon 70-200 F4 L non IS later in the year, but having watched it rise in price these past few weeks, I was umming and ahhing over buying it sooner, even though it is more than I wanted to spend, then I saw this with decent IQ, faster and cheaper, I figured I may as well buy it now, in case that goes up in price too! :D

Gem

[CSB]

After reading about this lens on another forum, and also on here, I have taken the plunge and just ordered it from Warehouse express for £430. Can't wait to get it and play with it now!! :woot:

I was planning on getting the canon 70-200 F4 L non IS later in the year, but having watched it rise in price these past few weeks, I was umming and ahhing over buying it sooner, even though it is more than I wanted to spend, then I saw this with decent IQ, faster and cheaper, I figured I may as well buy it now, in case that goes up in price too! :D

Gem

Please let us know your thoughts on this lens when you get it, all the other posters seem to be Nikon users, I'd like to know what another Canon user thinks before I take the plunge.

Thanks :)

[gembobs]

CSB, I saw a review here: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=648875 , which really got my interest, and there is a link posted on the second page to sample pics taken with this lens on canons too. Hope that helps!

I get mine on friday (well, it gets delivered to my parents address then), so will get to play with it over the weekend. Will post a few samples up if I get anything worth posting.

[ricky1980]

taken the plung and order one of this :) am i correct in sayong that this comes with 6 years warranty?

[puddleduck]

taken the plung and order one of this :) am i correct in sayong that this comes with 6 years warranty?

No, you are not.

1 Year.

[ricky1980]

ah, i was looking at the USA tamron site...which offers 6 year warranty :O

[viper_biker]

CadWest in the Mach loop, Have a Look here from Last Friday, as the pics are 1000 wide, to big to post on here.

The Mach loop is just WOW for plane pics.

Enjoy :)

http://www.phpbber.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=4880&mforum=lowflynet

and

http://www.phpbber.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=4853&mforum=lowflynet

Martin

Holy Moly, they are some great snaps.

[Dangermouse1964]

ah, i was looking at the USA tamron site...which offers 6 year warranty :O

I got 2 year at camerabox first year covered by manufacturer and the second by camerabox free:thumbs:

[whitey]

Lens looks like a good one for the price, Pete has kindly offered me a weekend of testing with it later this year, will be nice to test them side by side, me with the tamron from Pete and then the opposite way around so he can compare them both

[viper_biker]

Sorry for not knowing what you are comparing it with, is it the Sigma or Nikkor? I fully expect the Nikkor to walk all up and down the Tamron though.

[cowasaki]

Will it work with a 1.4TC for a bit more range? Would it be an f4 then? Looks a lot better value than the equivalent Nikon.

[Dangermouse1964]

Will it work with a 1.4TC for a bit more range? Would it be an f4 then? Looks a lot better value than the equivalent Nikon.

Heres the question I was pondering over to does anyone close have one so I can borrow it to try before I buy????:thumbs:

[Dangermouse1964]

Sorry for not knowing what you are comparing it with, is it the Sigma or Nikkor? I fully expect the Nikkor to walk all up and down the Tamron though.

In all honesty the siggy and tamron are better and worse than each other the sigma is very fast a/f the tamron is slower the siggy does get soft the tamron doesnt the sigma is about 650quid the tamrom isnt the sigma is more desirable the tamron isnt it all comes down to personal preference thats why I have told Steve he can try it against the sigma to give an honest opinion and let us all know as Steve takes some stunning shots and can compare it better than I ever could so lets wait n see what the verdict is :thumbs:

[ricky1980]

there is tamron TCs but can't find any relevant information on their website. i presume it is very crap

[Dangermouse1964]

there is tamron TCs but can't find any relevant information on their website. i presume it is very crap


Why presume:thinking:

[Dangermouse1964]

Must be this

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&sku=185152&is=REG&A=details&Q=

[cowasaki]

A 2x would give you even more reach but it is going to make it even slower whats that now f5.4? It is a really cheap way to get a decent quality 400mm lens though.

[ricky1980]

http://blog.nikonians.org/archives/Nikonians%20Teleconverter%20Table.pdf

quite interesting...also there are a few mentions of the 1.4TC producing very good IQ

I presumed because the lack of stock in UK :p

[Dangermouse1964]

A 2x would give you even more reach but it is going to make it even slower whats that now f5.4? It is a really cheap way to get a decent quality 400mm lens though.

There are 2 x tc but not compatible untill the new one is released which is in march I think
I really dont think it will slow down as its motor driven so shouldnt really make a difference

[ricky1980]

whats the difference between kenko non-dg TC and DG tc?

[cowasaki]

I mentioned the x2 because one of the links was to a x2 :)

This is exactly the route I was thinking of taking and it would be nice to have both 1.4 and 2. Then these could hopefully be used with other lenses too.

[Dangermouse1964]

I mentioned the x2 because one of the links was to a x2 :)

This is exactly the route I was thinking of taking and it would be nice to have both 1.4 and 2. Then these could hopefully be used with other lenses too.

I originally posted a 2xtc but read the post after and it was incompatible so I took it off so not to cause confusion:thumbs:

[Dangermouse1964]

whats the difference between kenko non-dg TC and DG tc?


DG is for digital and 35mm DC is digital only and sigma say its a coating on the lens and so on and on and on .....its some more letters added to the end of a name lol

[MJ Stebbings]

Please let us know your thoughts on this lens when you get it, all the other posters seem to be Nikon users, I'd like to know what another Canon user thinks before I take the plunge.

Thanks :)

I like mine but find it a little slow on the AF
For the price, very nice :)

[nictry]

I mentioned the x2 because one of the links was to a x2 :)

This is exactly the route I was thinking of taking and it would be nice to have both 1.4 and 2. Then these could hopefully be used with other lenses too.

Here is my dilemma, if you end up with a 1.4 or 2x and f4 and f5.6 respectively surely you are diminishing the benefit of having the f2.8 lens? Will it also affect the AF with the TC on? I guess that having a 280mm at f4 throughout and a 400mm at f5.6 would still be ok but just wondering if there are any other disadvantages? I'm wondering as I could possibly pick up on of the 1.4s from BHP this week and even ith the exhange rate it would be £120 for the TC and £435 for the lens so a 280mm f4 for £555 :thinking:

Hmm, just found out BHP is next to Penn Station where I will be Thursday so gives me an hour to have a walk around the store :woot:

[ricky1980]

i did sumthing stupid, i order a canon fit instead of nikon... :'( i hope they can swap it for me. anyone know anything about clifton cameras?

only realised tonight when they sent out the confirmation note, and saw the CANON, the word of doom...

[viper_biker]

***Runs off to check his e-mails***

Thank God, postage confirmation mail said Nikon, phew!!!!

[MJ Stebbings]

i did sumthing stupid, i order a canon fit instead of nikon... :'( i hope they can swap it for me. anyone know anything about clifton cameras?

only realised tonight when they sent out the confirmation note, and saw the CANON, the word of doom...

Had they already posted? Or was that just order confirmation? If so ring them asap!

[Dangermouse1964]

I mentioned the x2 because one of the links was to a x2 :)

This is exactly the route I was thinking of taking and it would be nice to have both 1.4 and 2. Then these could hopefully be used with other lenses too.


If they do them in the US surely we can get them here somewhere or have them sent over

http://www.tristatecamera.com/lookat.php?refid=282&sku=TAMAF2XC&refid=282 :thumbs:

[viper_biker]

I'll be up for a group-buy if there is one.

EDIT - I'd prefer a 1.4 X rather than a 2 though.

[Dangermouse1964]

I'll be up for a group-buy if there is one.

EDIT - I'd prefer a 1.4 X rather than a 2 though.

The 1.4 is available in the UK ....I think:thumbs:

[puddleduck]

If they do them in the US surely we can get them here somewhere or have them sent over

http://www.tristatecamera.com/lookat.php?refid=282&sku=TAMAF2XC&refid=282 :thumbs:

Just to point out that Tamron TCs are the same as Kenko TCs

Tamron just re-badges them.

A Kenko Pro 300 1.4 or Pro 300 2.0 is the same thing :)

[Dangermouse1964]

Cheers PD I didnt know that ...problem sorted THANKS

[puddleduck]

They (Kenko) are also sold as Jessops or Soligar too.

[ricky1980]

Had they already posted? Or was that just order confirmation? If so ring them asap!

they posted, but the tracking number came back negative and i haven't seen it yet supposely to get here before 12am RMSD...

I managed to get in touch with them to arrange a swap. just need to wait for the lens to get here now

[puddleduck]

Be interesting what other people think about this - I'm in the great optics but dog slow AF camp.

TBH for what I paid (£375 inc) I should have kept it - interestingly when I had it here for £375 (what I paid) no one wanted it - I can't help thinking my slating off the AF may have had something to do with it!!

I did manage to sell it, and the new owner is absolutely over-the-moon with it though and doesn't mind the AF either!

[Ben Hur]

I bought one, even after you advising me about the slow AF. I'm not interested in shooting sports or anything, and I have yet to use it to its full potential, but I love it. For me, the images are superb and I can't wait to get out in some decent light.

[fontmoss]

can i ask a silly question? is this (and similar) telephotos easy enough to handle without mono or tripod? looks massive esp as itll be on the front of a d40 and i know faster lens allows quicker shutter but is it worth investing in something to prop the beast up?

sorry newbie q

[MJ Stebbings]

Its a shame that i really need a quicker AF lens as i shoot moving things.
The optics are great but sadly i think its going to have to make way for the 70-200f4L eventually, and then that make way for the 70-200f2.8L

[viper_biker]

Just got a text message from home, the lense has been delivered, shame I have to work until 8 then go and spanner a mates race bike before the race season starts again in a few weeks.

Like a pig in doo-doo I am right now.

[Dangermouse1964]

can i ask a silly question? is this (and similar) telephotos easy enough to handle without mono or tripod? looks massive esp as itll be on the front of a d40 and i know faster lens allows quicker shutter but is it worth investing in something to prop the beast up?

sorry newbie q

Hand held isnt a major issue with it

[ricky1980]

depend on how steady you are, if you drank 6 espresso and hands shaking like leafs then it won't help even with tripod. the lens is quite heavy, a monopod might be quite useful as after a while your arm will be pretty sore

[Dangermouse1964]

depend on how steady you are, if you drank 6 espresso and hands shaking like leafs then it won't help even with tripod. the lens is quite heavy, a monopod might be quite useful as after a while your arm will be pretty sore


I think this applies to all lenses even a nifty ...it is quite heavy but lighter than a Nikon or sigma but only just if you check the weights I did notice some very slight shake last week at Sandtoft but most of that was down to a strong crosswind catching the lens (its 3mm longer than the sigma with hood) yet seems a lot more comfortable for a long stint around the neck on a strap due to it being a bit lighter

[fontmoss]

id plan on not havin espressos, never used a telephoto just wondering if theyre beasts in general or pretty handy

[puddleduck]

No 700-200 f/2.8 is going to be light, but 200mm is very easy to handhold, and as long as you can get 1/350 shutter on the long end, user shake* should not be an issue.

The Tamron 70-200 is lighter than any of the other 70-200s, and the tripod collar will also come off, shaving more weight too.


*I don't like the term "camera shake" as camera's do not shake, people do!

[whitey]

never had an issue with 70-200's weight, i think there light, but then again i have carried a 120-300 around a fair bit, never had any problems panning with one at 1/80 at 70mm, not tried 200mm yet but cant see it causing problems

[fontmoss]

cheers guys

[Gary Coyle]

ive just put a brand new Tammy 70-200mm for sale in the sale forums

[viper_biker]

ive just put a brand new Tammy 70-200mm for sale in the sale forums

Can I ask why?

EDIT - Sorry, I just read the For Sale post.

[viper_biker]

Mine arrived yesterday but only got to open it today. First impressions are that its a lot heavier than the 70-300VR, about the same height as the 300 when its fully extended, the focusing motor is cartainly not quiet (well, not as quiet as the VR) but that means nothing to me as I doubt I'll hear it track-side. It didn't really seem to hunt much at all but that was on a fixed object in a well lit room. The test will be on Sunday when I get to the track and I'll test the Tamron and Nikkor lenses on speed and will post a few unmarked ones and see if anyone can notice any differences in IQ. I look forward to testing it out soon.

[alex_m90]

The test will be on Sunday when I get to the track and I'll test the Tamron and Nikkor lenses on speed and will post a few unmarked ones and see if anyone can notice any differences in IQ. I look forward to testing it out soon.


Can't wait for that! I really need a 70-200 and not sure I can justify the Nikkor one so want to see how it compares! Also interested in the Sigma.

My problem is that it would be used for sports - football to be precise. Would the focussing be too slow on the Tamron for football?

If only somebody had a well priced 70-200 Sigma Nikon fit for sale! :(

[Dangermouse1964]

Can't wait for that! I really need a 70-200 and not sure I can justify the Nikkor one so want to see how it compares! Also interested in the Sigma.

My problem is that it would be used for sports - football to be precise. Would the focussing be too slow on the Tamron for football?

If only somebody had a well priced 70-200 Sigma Nikon fit for sale! :(


No it wont be to slow as some including myself have said ists really not that much slower than the sigma but if you do fancy the sigma thers a nearly new one just come up for sale in classifieds:thumbs:

[Dangermouse1964]

Just letting you know I did my first macro with it today ....I got the settings wrong as macro is not really my thing but it turned out okish if you fancy a look in macro and close up ...Spitfire

[alex_m90]

No it wont be to slow as some including myself have said ists really not that much slower than the sigma but if you do fancy the sigma thers a nearly new one just come up for sale in classifieds:thumbs:

Just saw that so enquiring now! :D Thanks Dangermouse!

Would both work ok with a D300/D700 with AF-C for Sports without hunting too much?

I really want to make the right decision here!

Is anyone able to make a comparison on focus speed compared to the 70-300 VR?

[Dangermouse1964]

I will be sending mine to whitey soon as hes a motorsport tog and a good one too so he will be able to give a true verdict for you in a week or two

[viper_biker]

Alex, as I said above, I'll have the 70-200 Tamron and the 70-300VR with me on Sunday, I'll see how they compare. I personally expect the Nikkor to be faster but the Tamron to be sharper.

[puddleduck]

Alex, as I said above, I'll have the 70-200 Tamron and the 70-300VR with me on Sunday, I'll see how they compare. I personally expect the Nikkor to be faster but the Tamron to be sharper.

The Nikkor AF is much faster than the Tamron.

Optically the 70-200 will be much stronger, although the Nikkor is very good between 70-200 although about two stops slower at 200mm.

[whitey]

I will be sending mine to whitey soon as hes a motorsport tog and a good one too so he will be able to give a true verdict for you in a week or two

not got much on Motorsport wise until mid to end of March when i may venture out, should be good to compare the two though

wonder if anyone will lend me a 70-200 VR to compare the three :lol:

[viper_biker]

Here she be,

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t172/viperbiker/IMGP5714.jpg

And OMG, I never thought I'd get to this point when I picked up the D300 in September,

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t172/viperbiker/IMGP5715.jpg

[Dom_Cabarete]

i know were talking nikon but in terms of the opposition ;)

What would you say the pros and cons are against a 70-200 f4 USM?

If anyone can answer that...

[puddleduck]

The 70-200 f/4 is an excellent lens, and IMHO superior to Canon's f/2.8 ones.

I'll speculate that stopped down to f/4 the Tamron will be sharper than the Canon 70-200 f/4 wide open - FYI the Tamron is sharper than the 70-200 f/2.8 when both are wide open.

The Canon will have faster focusing.

[Dom_Cabarete]

i only really use the 70-200 for watersports and most other action sports so would the slower AF pass for that?

I mean the canon is nice and the focus is lightning fast but i like the look of the tamron and fancy a change...

[puddleduck]

My workaround for the slow focusing was to shoot AF-C mode, which is a good mode. You probably know it as AI-Servo.

I just don't shoot fast stuff so I wouldn't like to comment. However I shoot slow stuff, and felt the AF was too slow and hesitant. This is on my D700 which focuses everything very fast. My Nikkor 70-200 VR is honestly about 10 times faster to focus than the Tamron.

[Dom_Cabarete]

hmmm see this is were i have the problem i feel like the faster focus for fast action sport really helps...

But reading that its sharper stopped down to f4 than the canon wide open makes me want it a little :p

[puddleduck]

But reading that its sharper stopped down to f4 than the canon wide open makes me want it a little :p

I'm just assuming here.. the Tamron is probably as sharp as the Nikkor 70-200 VR, which is sharper than the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 when both are wide open, so I think its a very reasonable assumption that stopped down 1 stop will match a 70-200 f/4 wide open.

[Dom_Cabarete]

decisions decisions :thinking:

[Dangermouse1964]

decisions decisions :thinking:

Sorry for starting this thread guys:lol::lol::lol:

[alex_m90]

Sorry for starting this thread guys:lol::lol::lol:

I have no clue what I want in the 70-200 range now (that I can realistically afford)!

I thought I had my heart set on one, and then this thread appears.... :'(
Thanks Dangermouse! :lol:

[Dom_Cabarete]

Sorry for starting this thread guys:lol::lol::lol:

This is terrible the only advantages i see of the canon is the fast AF... Can somebody say anything that would make me think the tamron is better for sport than the canon...

I mean eventually i will upgrade to canon f2.8 and a 300mm but for right now...What do you think?:help:

[Dom_Cabarete]

please put me out of my misery...:shake: i cant decide

[Redspider]

please put me out of my misery...:shake: i cant decide

I can't help with the Canon version, but I have the Nikon version. On this page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/7759293@N02/page4/) & some of the pages after, are some photo's taken with the Tamron 70-200 f2.8. I like it very much, however since my new Nikon AF-S 300mm f/4 ED-IF, the Tamron has taken a back seat.

[ricky1980]

just got mine today...


It has a lot of plastic which gives its weight saving and makes handling decent, but it does feel cheap and less robust.

on the D90 the AF motor doesn't feel any slower than any of my other non-motored lens. but it's as noisy as the non-motored, and it does hunt.

picture quality looks good, quite sharp and very very close focus distance, it says 0.9m but i think it's a bit closer than that, which is good for macro work suppose.

looking forward to play with this lens.

[viper_biker]

Had the Tamron out yesterday and was going to do a comparison between it and the 70-300VR, but I liked the Tamron that much that the VR didn't see the light of day. It was quite bright and sunny for a change and I must say that I was very impressed. Being my first 2.8 lens I was obviously impressed, and the lens comped quite well (IMO) It hunted once the whole day but once it locked onto a bike/rider it stayed there. I've had a look at the pictures from yesterday and there seems to be a lot more 'keepers' than there normally would have been. The biggest impression it had on me was the DoF at 2.8, I was well impressed. Here's just a few from a few mates and I'll get the track shots up later (after work)

(no C+C please as there were 3 people using the camera and its difficult to remember who took what pic, but I do know which ones are mine LOL)

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t172/viperbiker/Wheelie/DSC_4146.jpg

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t172/viperbiker/Wheelie/DSC_4129.jpg

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t172/viperbiker/Wheelie/DSC_4166.jpg

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t172/viperbiker/Wheelie/DSC_4318.jpg

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t172/viperbiker/Wheelie/DSC_4143.jpg

[Dangermouse1964]

mine hasnt been off the camera since I got it and all the shots I have posted in the last two weeks are from it including the spitfire in macro:thumbs:

[viper_biker]

Meant to add that none of the images have been edited or Post Processed, they are how they came from the camera (because I'm really crap at CS3 and NX2)

[Radiohead]

Where was the focus point on the 2 SV shots?

[viper_biker]

Where was the focus point on the 2 SV shots?

No idea mate, my friend Ryan took those. 1st, 2nd and 5th were my shots.

[nictry]

No idea mate, my friend Ryan took those. 1st, 2nd and 5th were my shots.

I am glad you said that as 3 and 4 look very soft/oof to me?

[viper_biker]

I am glad you said that as 3 and 4 look very soft/oof to me?

What can I say, he's a Canon user... says it all really :lol:

[Bazza]

:lol::lol::lol:

Ryan is getting the link to this :lol:

they came out well mate, that Z1000 is a lovely bike :naughty:, it's just a pity it gets treated like that :nono::cuckoo::thinking:

[viper_biker]

:lol::lol::lol:

Ryan is getting the link to this :lol:



That's fine. What worried me was he looked down the fat end of the lense and said, 'I can't see anything' LOL

[Dangermouse1964]

That's fine. What worried me was he looked down the fat end of the lense and said, 'I can't see anything' LOL


:lol::lol::lol:

[viper_biker]

Here's 10 of my shots from Sunday with this lense,

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=1344954#post1344954

[gembobs]

Got my lens on Friday, and had a little play over the weekend. I am very pleased with it, it weighs less than I was expecting (I tried a 70-200 F2.8 L IS before and found that very heavy), and the AF is better than I was expecting too.

Took a few shots, but having problems trying to upload them onto my smugmug (keeps crashing firefox and IE for some reason :thinking:), but have managed to get two up, which I will share with you guys.


f2.8, 1/1250, ISO 400 @163mm, handheld grabbed shot - focus was between the two of them according to zoombrowser:

http://gembobs.smugmug.com/photos/485219574_xsfUn-M.jpg

f5.6, 1/160, ISO 400 @151mm, handheld semi set up - focus on top of my dads head:

http://gembobs.smugmug.com/photos/485219649_NGGiG-M.jpg

Not really trying to do much but get a feel for the lens, so mainly grabbed handheld shots, but very impressed - especially looking at the SS for the second shot - 1/160 on a 200mm lens handheld!

[Dangermouse1964]

little red x gembobs....put em in photobucket first mate then copy the url to here :thumbs:

[nictry]

Got my lens on Friday, and had a little play over the weekend. I am very pleased with it, it weighs less than I was expecting (I tried a 70-200 F2.8 L IS before and found that very heavy), and the AF is better than I was expecting too.

Took a few shots, but having problems trying to upload them onto my smugmug (keeps crashing firefox and IE for some reason :thinking:), but have managed to get two up, which I will share with you guys.


f2.8, 1/1250, ISO 400 @163mm, handheld grabbed shot - focus was between the two of them according to zoombrowser:

http://gembobs.smugmug.com/photos/485219574_xsfUn-M.jpg

f5.6, 1/160, ISO 400 @151mm, handheld semi set up - focus on top of my dads head:

http://gembobs.smugmug.com/photos/485219649_NGGiG-M.jpg

Not really trying to do much but get a feel for the lens, so mainly grabbed handheld shots, but very impressed - especially looking at the SS for the second shot - 1/160 on a 200mm lens handheld!

No pics showing :thinking:

[gembobs]

Sorry about that - I had this gallery in smugmug set to no external links (doh!), should be working now.

I did preview it, and they appeared, but it must have been as I was logged into smugmug at the time too, sorry!

PS: I am at work, I can see the images now (not logged into smugmug either), but I can't see those by Viper Biker - think work must be blocking certain images? I will double check when I get home tonight to see if they are working now!

[viper_biker]

I can see yours and mine gem. Nice captures there. I know that my work block all flickr images though.

[Dangermouse1964]

Nice shots Gem good use of DoF

[Dangermouse1964]

CameraBox have them back in stock if anyone is interested and the prices have not changed:thumbs:

http://www.camerabox.co.uk/productDA1.asp?ProductName=Tamron-70-200mm-F2.8-Di-LD-(IF)-(Nikon-Motorised-Fit)&ProductID=5033

[Dangermouse1964]

Just checked camera box and my word one left lol they sold fast

[MJ Stebbings]

Just checked camera box and my word one left lol they sold fast

Its because they are damn good value at that price.
I'm very close to selling mine as i have found a Canon 70-200 f4L and i need the faster af. I just hope i dont miss the f2.8, as i havent used it that low yet but it will be one of those things...you wont need it till its gone!

[gembobs]

Thanks for the comments on the shots - I am pleased with them, especially as these were pretty much grabbed and we were on our way home from the pub!!

Just checked on WEX, they say they have canon fit in stock at £429, the nikon fit are £469 though.

[alex_m90]

Does anybody have an opinion on whether the AF on this lens would be fast enough on a D300 for football?

Just worried that it would spent ages hunting and miss getting shots of a player making a slide challenge or 2 players tugging on each others shirts down the line.

Can anyone make a comparison of AF speed against the 70-300 VR?

Just want to clear this up before actually going and buying one! :eek:

Thanks in advance!

[nictry]

Does anybody have an opinion on whether the AF on this lens would be fast enough on a D300 for football?

Just worried that it would spent ages hunting and miss getting shots of a player making a slide challenge or 2 players tugging on each others shirts down the line.

Can anyone make a comparison of AF speed against the 70-300 VR?

Just want to clear this up before actually going and buying one! :eek:

Thanks in advance!

All I will comment is that I tested this out instore and it was by far the worst 'hunting' out of this the Sigma and the Nikon, it barely held focus on a guy walking around the store let alone fast moving objects. Having said that I know a lot of others think it is plenty fast enough and doesn't seem to hunt for them so maybe I just tried a bad copy?

[babytiger]

Well Dangermouse uses his out at Sandtoft on aircraft coming in and has no problems with the focusing it locks on and holds focus

[Dangermouse1964]

I dont seem to be having any problems with the lens at all, Its fast enough to lock and focus on aircraft travelling at 75mph so I cant see football being a problem and as for it being sharp have a look here
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=117852

[desantnik]

Everything I have read on this lens is what others in this thread have already said - lovely glass, sharp enough to cut yourself on but really slow focusing.

I have a Tamron 17-50 here on eval and thats just the same... which is fine for that use because I only want it for static shots....

I don't think the 70-200 will be up to much for motorsport action unless you shoot to take into account AF speed problems.

The Nikon 70-300 would be a better bet for anyone wanting to try motorsport on the cheap.

[sdb123]

Has anyone used this lens for portrait style shots? If so, how does it fare?

[CSB]

Everything I have read on this lens is what others in this thread have already said - lovely glass, sharp enough to cut yourself on but really slow focusing.

I have a Tamron 17-50 here on eval and thats just the same... which is fine for that use because I only want it for static shots....

I have the 17-50 and I've found it to be quite fast to focus, although it is a bit buzzy. If the 70-200 focuses as fast as my 17-50 I might just abuse the credit card and get one. Wish there was a way I could try one out before I buy :|

[desantnik]

CSB - its definitely not "fast" - "fast" is the Nikon 70-200 VR or the Canon 70-200 (any of the family).

It does depend on your usage though... I'd not try and use it for motorsport, but for static (or slow) subjects you will get some lovely results.

[V8burble]

Even with motorsport, I guess it depends if panning or head-on shots, and what subject and lighting levels etc etc etc. It appears to be happy with aircraft at 75mph?

[Wilky76]

Hi first post.

Im in need of a fast telephoto lens so im considering the Tamron 70-200mm F2.8, reason being, i can't really afford the Nikon 70-200mm VR.

So what people's opinion on this lens.
Also any sample pictures would be great.

[Slapo]

Have a look here:
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=114034&highlight=Tamron+70-200

You can get more results here on TP if you search for "Tamron 70-200" or the exact title of this thread, "Tamron 70-200mm F2.8" (both search terms without the quotes).

[Wilky76]

thanks

[Slapo]

No problem :)

[cowasaki]

DM, have you managed to get any more shots with it or is the plane the only example? Also do you know if it is any good with a 1.4X ?

I am thinking of replacing the 18-200 with one of these and a better 18-85mm ISH lens or using the 18-200 with my second body. I am not in a hurry as I have about 3 things I need to pay for this month yet!! (macbook, big wad of paper and some ND filters :))

[Dangermouse1964]

Hi wilky I have this lens and although there are some mixed comments about it I love it
Its superb for fast action even though the A/F is a bit slower than the sigma but not enough to make any real difference but where it is superb is in the sharpness its just so sharp so if you can find one in the 450ish price range .....buy it you wont be dissapointed:thumbs:

[Dangermouse1964]

I have loads taken with it now heres a few from a couple of weeks ago

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=117852

Will post some from today later

[V8burble]

Have you considered the Nikon 80-200 if the 70-200 is a bit too much money to spend?

[alex_m90]

Hi wilky I have this lens and although there are some mixed comments about it I love it
Its superb for fast action even though the A/F is a bit slower than the sigma but not enough to make any real difference but where it is superb is in the sharpness its just so sharp so if you can find one in the 450ish price range .....buy it you wont be dissapointed:thumbs:

Is there any comparison in AF speed between the Tamron 70-200 and the Nikon 80-200?

Also the images you posted in the other thread using this lens - are they out of camera of have they been PPed and sharpened etc?

[V8burble]

The 80-200 AF D (after the push-pull, but before the more expensive AF-S) is only a little slower than the AF-S version, so no problem for motorsport even and very sharp, you may struggle with the Tamron but it depends on your use for it of course.

[gembobs]

Is there any comparison in AF speed between the Tamron 70-200 and the Nikon 80-200?

Also the images you posted in the other thread using this lens - are they out of camera of have they been PPed and sharpened etc?


Here is one I took with this lens the first day I got it - Canon 40D, f2.8, 1/800, ISO 400, @135mm. No PP - straight conversion - shot in RAW, converted to JPEG with sharpness set to +3 (DPP default - I always sharpen further with USM in CS3). Focus was on the bottom of the yellow centre of the main flower head.

http://gembobs.smugmug.com/photos/491923752_ac8rq-L.jpg

PP'd version can be seen: http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=119178

Hope that helps

[nictry]

The 80-200 AF D (after the push-pull, but before the more expensive AF-S) is only a little slower than the AF-S version, so no problem for motorsport even and very sharp, you may struggle with the Tamron but it depends on your use for it of course.

I tried the Tamron and Sigma 70-200 and personally found the Tamron to be very slow at AF and also a lot of hunting to get focus too. Others here love theirs though so I would recommend trying one out to see what you personally think and whether you can put up with the potentially slow AF?

I actually ended up buying the 80-200 mentioned above and love it, yes it is a few years old now but it is a genuine Nikon lens, very well built and I picked up a totally mint copy for less than the price of the Sigma/Tamron 70-200, it has very fast AF although as mentioned above not as quick as the AF-S version, I got the 2 ring version though rather than the older push/pull but can definetly recommend it if you can get hold of one to try it might be another lens to add into the list for consideration?

[Dangermouse1964]

Is there any comparison in AF speed between the Tamron 70-200 and the Nikon 80-200?

Also the images you posted in the other thread using this lens - are they out of camera of have they been PPed and sharpened etc?


All my shots are straight out of the camera apart from a resize for on here no pp at all:thumbs:

[viper_biker]

I have had onef or about 3 weeks now and as my first 2.8 I'm very impressed, but its certainly not without flaw, but I think the price outweighs this. It's not overly fast (especially for motorsport,which is what i shoot) but every now and then it captures a cracker. This was one of my best from today,

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t172/viperbiker/DSC_5499.jpg

[Joe T]

Threads merged

[viper_biker]

Another super weekend out with this lens. Only my third actual time out and I think its starting to show how good the glass is. When you get 'the right shot' it really is pin sharp but as said before it's not that quick and it did hunt some more this weekend but here are 2 results from Saturday. My internet at home is playing up since last night but I'll add a 100% crop of these shortly.

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t172/viperbiker/Clubmands%2021st%20Mar%202009/Clubmans21-3-0913.jpg

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t172/viperbiker/Clubmands%2021st%20Mar%202009/Clubmans21-3-0942.jpg

[CSB]

Those look lovely and sharp. Whats your average "keeper" rate when shooting motorsport?

[viper_biker]

Shoot to keep is not something I've ever worked out but I have over 200 pics left after taking about 700 shots. I could probably narrow that down again to less but people are just happy to see pictures of themselves and not care about how much detail is in the shot or if there was poor light or some camera shake etc