This will be a difficult decision for me. I have the SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD, love it, and have no intention of "upgrading" to the EF24-70L II due to $700+ price difference and IS. I know there are a lot of granite-armed gunslingers out there who insist that IS is not necessary in this focal range, but I find it incredibly useful. This choice is not so obvious as it is more apples to apples. I look forward to seeing more samples and some in depth reviews. Hey Rogier, how about a quickie? I am still hoping the EF70-200L II will drop below the $2000 level sometime after the holidays. Thankfully, I have a copy of the most wonderful EF70-200 f/4L IS, so I'm in no major hurry...
July 28, 2014, 04:22:06 AM
Topic: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di VC USD Hands-On (Read 19145 times)
Don Haines
- Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
-
- Posts: 2806
- Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
-
It doesn't have the red ring, therefore, I'll stay with Canon f2.8 IS II
But it could have the red ring... I have added the red ring to several zoom lenses. Go to the grocery store, get some broccoli, go home and eat it. Take the red rubber band that was on the broccoli and stetch it over your lens and voila! You have a lens with a red ring!
Seriously though, you can use an appropriate sized rubber band, half on the zoom ring and half on the lens body, to combat the evils of lens creep :-)
Logged
The best camera is the one in your hands
AtSea
- Power Shot G16
- Posts: 30
-
As they write in the disclaimer of the article:
PHOTONews Canada is owned by Amplis Foto Inc. Amplis Foto Inc. is the distributor of Tamron lenses for Canada. The words are our own based on the lens we were provided by Tamron Japan.
Not to say there's an obvious bias, but I would check out a few more reviews before dishing out $1500
PHOTONews Canada is owned by Amplis Foto Inc. Amplis Foto Inc. is the distributor of Tamron lenses for Canada. The words are our own based on the lens we were provided by Tamron Japan.
Not to say there's an obvious bias, but I would check out a few more reviews before dishing out $1500
Logged
dilbert
- Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
- Posts: 2676
-
What is the price of this lens?
The review seems to say $2099 but the canonrumors blurb mentions $1499.
The price at B&H is $1499
Ah, from the review:
"This lens has an MSRP of $2099.00 in Canada. Street price will obviously be below that number, but we’ll have to wait and see where the photo dealers price it."
Logged
jondave
- Rebel SL1
- Posts: 91
-
'Legendary' immediately rang alarm bells for me... It's the marketing spin that's legendary I would say.
Logged
cliffwang
- 6D
-
- Posts: 476
-
That's real nice to see the third party manufacturers can make good lenses. Thus, we will have more choices and it could push Canon making better products for us. However, this lens is too late on the market. Canon 70-200 F/2.8 IS MK2 have been released for three years. Moreover, if the IQ is only similar to Canon 70-200 F/2.8 IS MK2, 1500 USD is too expensive. The reasonable price tag should be about 1300 USD.
Logged
Canon 5D3 | Samyang 14mm F/2.8 | Sigma 50mm F/1.4 | Tamron 24-70mm F/2.8 VC | Canon 70-200mm F/2.8 IS MK2 | Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro L | Canon Closed-up 500D | 430EX | Kenko 2x Teleplus Pro 300 | Manfrotto Tripod
canon rumors FORUM
that1guyy
- Rebel T5i
- Posts: 142
-
I'm loving these third party lenses.
On my wish list:
Sigma 35 1.4
Tamron 70-200 2.8
Also need a 17 - 55 (approx) but the Canon f2.8 one is too expensive. Anyone know if the Sigma 17-50 2.8 is good?
On my wish list:
Sigma 35 1.4
Tamron 70-200 2.8
Also need a 17 - 55 (approx) but the Canon f2.8 one is too expensive. Anyone know if the Sigma 17-50 2.8 is good?
robbymack
- 7D
- Posts: 410
-
I'm loving these third party lenses.
On my wish list:
Sigma 35 1.4
Tamron 70-200 2.8
Also need a 17 - 55 (approx) but the Canon f2.8 one is too expensive. Anyone know if the Sigma 17-50 2.8 is good?
the tamron 17-50 2.8 without VC is supposed to be pretty good, apparently the VC version is a bit softer. That being said I used to own a canon 17-55 2.8 it was awesome and I still miss that range on FF. the 24-70 gets close, but I loved the fact that at 55mm on apc c the canon was a good portrait lens too. 70 on ff is just a little short of ideal.
Logged