Alternatives to Tamron SP 70-300mm f4-5.6 Di VC USD?

W

Whiters

Messages
169
Name
Ross
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm seeking a telephoto lens for a) action shots of dogs and occasionally b) landscapes with a sturdy tripod. The above named lens has received good reviews and I looked at one in-store yesterday (at £369) and was impressed with its sharpness.

The only thing holding me back is that I worry that I'll be spending £150-200 more than necessary for the Vibration Control (IS), which I'll hardly ever use for my intended purposes.

So is there a lens out there which is either:-

1. Signficantly cheaper than the Tamron with similarly good optics, but no VC/IS?

or

2. A similar price with similarly good optics, and a faster aperture, but no VC/IS?

Thanks in advance for any help guys.
 
I forgot to say that I'm already aware of the Canon 70-200 f/4 L USM but I'm a bit put off by having to spend an extra £100 on a tripod collar. Is the collar strictly necessary?

I'm also wondering if this Canon lens is a bit big to hand-hold with flexibility (for the dog action shots)?
 
The tamron has no tripod collar either. What's more, you can't even buy one for the tamron. A tripod collar makes it's more balanced on a tripod, and lets you change between portrait and landscape orientation much quicker.

The 70-200 is certainly not to big to handhold. And it's constant aperture, at 200mm it's faster than the tamron, so you can get faster shutter speeds.

If you don't need IS, I'd go for the 70-200, real gem of a lens.
 
Last edited:
The canon 70-200 F4 L is actually slightly lighter than the Tamron and third party tripod brackets can be bought on ebay much cheaper than the canon originals.

Of course you will loose 100mm over the Tamron, but if thats ok then I would go for the canon.
 
Another advantage of the 70-200 f4 L is that with a 77mm filter thread (the same as my Siggy 10-20) I won't have to fork out for a new UV filter or adaptor/step-up ring to use Lee filters with it. A minor consideration I know but it does bring down the overall cost a bit.

Hmmmm, will have a look for tripod collars and have a think about it. I guess I need to have a play with a 70-200 to decide for sure, will have a look in at my local LCE tomorrow.
 
Whiters said:
Another advantage of the 70-200 f4 L is that with a 77mm filter thread (the same as my Siggy 10-20) I won't have to fork out for a new UV filter or adaptor/step-up ring to use Lee filters with it. A minor consideration I know but it does bring down the overall cost a bit.

Hmmmm, will have a look for tripod collars and have a think about it. I guess I need to have a play with a 70-200 to decide for sure, will have a look in at my local LCE tomorrow.
Click to expand...

I believe 70-200 F4 is 67mm not 77mm...
 
Yes it is 67mm, sorry, I did read on one of the website specs that it was 77mm but everywhere else says 67mm.

I had a look at the 70-200 in a shop on Thurs, as Ian said it is actually lighter than the Tamron and smaller than I expected, which is good (they look massive on the websites!).

I'm sold that the 70-200 is worth paying an extra £100 for a brand new one over the Tamron for quality, I just need to decide now whether I need the extra reach of the Tamron. On reviewing my better dog shots, a few were over 200mm but possibly I could have easily stepped closer to those dogs. Will get out over the coming days with my old Canon 75-300mm and try to get a feel of whether 200mm will be a big limit or not.

Thanks for all the help chaps. Much appreciated and I will let you know my final decision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top