Comparison: Tamron 70-210mm f/4 Di VC,Canon 70-200mm f/4 IS II & Nikkor 70-200mm f/4 VR

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark II
Jul 20, 2010
6,954
52
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
#1
HTML:
<iframe width="728" height="409" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/L7LP5m15iDM" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>The folks at DPReview have compared the Tamron 70-210mm F4 Di VC, Canon 70-200mm f/4 IS II & Nikkor 70-200mm f/4 VR to figure out if you would be happy with the Tamron offering over the great and more expensive Canon and Nikon branded 70-200 f/4s.</p>
<p>Comparing the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II to the Tamron 70-210mm f/4 VC was a pretty easy comparison, if you can afford it, the Canon is the much better lens. Interestingly, it wasn’t as cut and dry with Nikon, as the Tamron performed very favourably against the much more expensive OEM lens.</p>
<p><strong>From DPReview:</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>70-200mm f/4 zoom lenses may not get as much attention as their faster f/2.8 siblings, but for many photographers these lenses hit the perfect sweet spot of price, performance, and weight.This week, Chris and Jordan go to the Calgary Stampede with pro photographer Kyle Marquardt to shoot the Canon 70-200mm f/4, Nikon 70-200mm f/4, and Tamron 70-210mm f/4. Watch the episode to find out what they think.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.adorama.com/ca7020042.html?kbid=64393">Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II at Adorama</a> | <a href="https://www.adorama.com/tm70210eos.html?kbid=64393">Tamron 70-210mm f/4 VC at Adorama</a></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
 
Jan 21, 2015
187
29
#3
I don't really like video reviews (except Kai Wong but that is more entertainment than review). Could someone summarize for me?
 

pj1974

EOS Rebel SL2
Oct 18, 2011
554
13
Adelaide, Australia
#6
Adelino said:
I don't really like video reviews (except Kai Wong but that is more entertainment than review). Could someone summarize for me?
Hi Adelino

I also do not like video reviews. Much prefer a written review, with sample images, comparisons. I have viewed a few video reviews and tech youtubes over the years, but still much prefer written content. I can understand why some people prefer video reviews... horses for courses. However in this instance I had viewed the DPReview / TV duo video (it was about 10 minutes from memory) - as I wanted to see their style.

My take away (exec summary) is as follows:
1) Canon's 70-200mm f/4 II is slightly sharper over the zoom range on average than the other 2. It also and has best (fastest, most consistent) AF for sports over the Tamron.
2) Nikon's is still very good overall, but just not quite on the new Canon's II level. A good choice if money is not an issue.
3) Tamron is great value... is slightly less sharp at 210 (zoom back a tad) and at minimum focusing distance. It has a good focus ring for video. (and switched from the typical Canon order (zoom ring vs focus ring placement / direction).
If needing best value, go for Tamron. All have effective IS, the Canon's slightly more effective, and the panning modes on both OEMs are a bonus.
If you have a bit of cash to spare, makes more sense to get the Canon... but less in it for the Nikon mount.

For what it's worth, my final bit of thought after viewing the video, is that I still so happy I purchased the 70-300mm L just after it was released... the extra reach - and its shape / size make it my perfect telezoom (for travel and flexibility). It retains f/4 - f/4.5 aperture for most of the 70-200mm range anyway, and it's sharp, great focus and IS, etc. ha ha.

Well, I trust this helps!

regards,

PJ 8)
 
Jan 21, 2015
187
29
#7
pj1974 said:
Adelino said:
I don't really like video reviews (except Kai Wong but that is more entertainment than review). Could someone summarize for me?
Hi Adelino

I also do not like video reviews. Much prefer a written review, with sample images, comparisons. I have viewed a few video reviews and tech youtubes over the years, but still much prefer written content. I can understand why some people prefer video reviews... horses for courses. However in this instance I had viewed the DPReview / TV duo video (it was about 10 minutes from memory) - as I wanted to see their style.

My take away (exec summary) is as follows:
1) Canon's 70-200mm f/4 II is slightly sharper over the zoom range on average than the other 2. It also and has best (fastest, most consistent) AF for sports over the Tamron.
2) Nikon's is still very good overall, but just not quite on the new Canon's II level. A good choice if money is not an issue.
3) Tamron is great value... is slightly less sharp at 210 (zoom back a tad) and at minimum focusing distance. It has a good focus ring for video. (and switched from the typical Canon order (zoom ring vs focus ring placement / direction).
If needing best value, go for Tamron. All have effective IS, the Canon's slightly more effective, and the panning modes on both OEMs are a bonus.
If you have a bit of cash to spare, makes more sense to get the Canon... but less in it for the Nikon mount.

For what it's worth, my final bit of thought after viewing the video, is that I still so happy I purchased the 70-300mm L just after it was released... the extra reach - and its shape / size make it my perfect telezoom (for travel and flexibility). It retains f/4 - f/4.5 aperture for most of the 70-200mm range anyway, and it's sharp, great focus and IS, etc. ha ha.

Well, I trust this helps!

regards,

PJ 8)
Thanks for the summary and bonus 70-300 info!
 

Durf

Picture Taker - Image Maker
#8
pj1974 said:
Adelino said:
I don't really like video reviews (except Kai Wong but that is more entertainment than review). Could someone summarize for me?
Hi Adelino

I also do not like video reviews. Much prefer a written review, with sample images, comparisons. I have viewed a few video reviews and tech youtubes over the years, but still much prefer written content. I can understand why some people prefer video reviews... horses for courses. However in this instance I had viewed the DPReview / TV duo video (it was about 10 minutes from memory) - as I wanted to see their style.

My take away (exec summary) is as follows:
1) Canon's 70-200mm f/4 II is slightly sharper over the zoom range on average than the other 2. It also and has best (fastest, most consistent) AF for sports over the Tamron.
2) Nikon's is still very good overall, but just not quite on the new Canon's II level. A good choice if money is not an issue.
3) Tamron is great value... is slightly less sharp at 210 (zoom back a tad) and at minimum focusing distance. It has a good focus ring for video. (and switched from the typical Canon order (zoom ring vs focus ring placement / direction).
If needing best value, go for Tamron. All have effective IS, the Canon's slightly more effective, and the panning modes on both OEMs are a bonus.
If you have a bit of cash to spare, makes more sense to get the Canon... but less in it for the Nikon mount.

For what it's worth, my final bit of thought after viewing the video, is that I still so happy I purchased the 70-300mm L just after it was released... the extra reach - and its shape / size make it my perfect telezoom (for travel and flexibility). It retains f/4 - f/4.5 aperture for most of the 70-200mm range anyway, and it's sharp, great focus and IS, etc. ha ha.

Well, I trust this helps!

regards,

PJ 8)
Great summary, and I agree with you about the 70-300L lens. I also have this lens and it is an amazing lens. I keep it on my 80D most of the time for the extra reach and it's image quality and sharpness is outstanding!
 
Jul 16, 2017
71
10
Hamburg, Germany
#10
These reviews always ignore resale value. Pay less today and get less tomorrow.
I would say that is a good thing. Resale Value isn't a propertie of a lens in question. It is determined by the marked at the time it get's resold, which should be the future. I prefer reviews that Review the lens properties and don't speculate about the future.
 
Likes: AlanF