November 28, 2014, 09:55:23 PM

Author Topic: Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8, non-stabilized version, works pretty good IMO  (Read 1140 times)

Aglet

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1081
    • View Profile
.. cuz the stabilized one's only just been announced.
Actually, having expected its announcement back in spring, I opted to purchase the original version in F-mount so I'd have that range covered on my FF Nikon bodies until I could afford/justify a new Nikon version.  Since I mostly shoot all manual, AF speed and even accuracy is of little importance to me.  Resolution tests looked pretty good for the price.

I was concerned about the MF precision with this lens since the end-to-end focus throw is not very long but it's very smooth and lightly damped and works well in the field.  Better MF than Nikon's v2, IMO.

The other thing that worked well in the field is the lens' absolute sharpness performance.  It's amazing, considering the price!  Smooth bokeh, very close focus ability, and it's stupid-sharp! Enough that I was able to generate moire issues on distant brickwork using 135mm FL.  Very low CA too.
I don't know if it's quite as sharp as Canon's v2 of the 70-200/2.8 but it's good enough for pixel-level detail on my D800e and that means I'll be keeping it and not buying the Nikon one.

end point...
If you're hankering for a good deal on a fast 70-200mm zoom, the Tamron is worth considering.  If you don't need IS, it's comparable to the non-IS Canon lens at a lower price.

canon rumors FORUM


Albi86

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
Re: Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8, non-stabilized version, works pretty good IMO
« Reply #1 on: September 24, 2012, 04:06:05 AM »
.. cuz the stabilized one's only just been announced.
Actually, having expected its announcement back in spring, I opted to purchase the original version in F-mount so I'd have that range covered on my FF Nikon bodies until I could afford/justify a new Nikon version.  Since I mostly shoot all manual, AF speed and even accuracy is of little importance to me.  Resolution tests looked pretty good for the price.

I was concerned about the MF precision with this lens since the end-to-end focus throw is not very long but it's very smooth and lightly damped and works well in the field.  Better MF than Nikon's v2, IMO.

The other thing that worked well in the field is the lens' absolute sharpness performance.  It's amazing, considering the price!  Smooth bokeh, very close focus ability, and it's stupid-sharp! Enough that I was able to generate moire issues on distant brickwork using 135mm FL.  Very low CA too.
I don't know if it's quite as sharp as Canon's v2 of the 70-200/2.8 but it's good enough for pixel-level detail on my D800e and that means I'll be keeping it and not buying the Nikon one.

end point...
If you're hankering for a good deal on a fast 70-200mm zoom, the Tamron is worth considering.  If you don't need IS, it's comparable to the non-IS Canon lens at a lower price.

Hi!

Thank you for the feedback. I was wondering, how effective is M/F on rapid targets? What is your rough % of nailed focusings?

Aglet

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1081
    • View Profile
Re: Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8, non-stabilized version, works pretty good IMO
« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2012, 04:11:35 AM »
Thank you for the feedback. I was wondering, how effective is M/F on rapid targets? What is your rough % of nailed focusings?

No idea yet, first shots today were to test optical performance for landscape work, I shoulda mentioned that.
AF on static targets was mostly perfect.

When I'm shooting action I use different gear, so far.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8, non-stabilized version, works pretty good IMO
« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2012, 04:11:35 AM »