Advice about the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD

[bigdaddy]

Hallo everyone,

I'm considering buying this lens. I read some very good reviews. I checked TDP hier, http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=687&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=0&LensComp=833&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0 and the sharpness seems to fall off at 200mm. Is this a common problem and does it matter in real life?

Thanks for any advice.

Bigdaddy

 

[CarlMillerPhoto]

I've never had any problems shooting mine wide open, throughout the range. I've been very, very happy.

 

[tayassu]

I thought about this lens extensively, and I very often (also on this forum) read that the sharpness @200mm is indeed not as good as the rest of the FL's.
A lot of people using this lens zoom a little back after the got to 200mm.
It also suffers from AF inconsistencies (as you surely read) and from focus breathing... at MFD it is only around 140mm. If you can afford it, go for the Canon Version II. This is a true beast of a lens.

 

[bigdaddy]

Hallo tayassu,

yeah the other option is the canon version. right now its only 650 Euros more than the tamaron.

That's what I've been reading about backing off slightly at 200mm. I've not read anything about AF problems. Tamaron licenses the AF Interface from canon, right?

The main thing that I am worried about is sharpness.

Thanks,

Bigdaddy

 

[bigdaddy]

Hello CarlMiller,

Thanks for your reply. Pretty pictures. Do you use the tamaron professionally?
Can you add anything about the AF. Do you have any problems with it?

Bigdaddy

 

[geonix]

I have just bought this lens a few weeks ago. So far I am very happy with the sharpness and I mostly shot at 200mm. As with all lenses, it gets sharper if you close the apparature to f4 or even further but even at f2.8 I find it quite sharp.
Of course I do also look up lenses and cameras on the internet before I buy something, but sometimes it gives you contrary results. I found reports which stated that the tamron is actually even sharper than the canon version at 200mm wide open. Then others find the opposite.
But it always seemed to be a very close run and all reviews found the tamron an excellent lens for the price.

The higher price is not always a garantee for also higher image quality

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

I'm not sure what to make of Bryan's results at 200mm. I've used two copies - one loaned to me by Tamron for review and a retail copy that I own and both are very sharp at 200mm wide open.

AF accuracy is not a problem. I've owned and tested a large number of Tamron products and AF accuracy is always good. I don't think the Tamron is as good as the Canon as the Canon in terms of speed and in AF Servo mode, but it is actually sharper at most focal lengths and has nicer bokeh.

 

[Lawliet]

I'm not sure what to make of Bryan's results at 200mm.

Compare them to the f/3.2 results, That much change for a 1/3 stop makes me think of either a mistake, very specific sample problem or, if it where off center, something with the field flattening.

Personally I'd ignore the outlier, for 3D-subjects the Tamron is great ;D

 

[cameraguy1972]

Canon does not license their autofocus to any 3rd party manufacturers. That is why 3rd party lenses suffer on Canon bodies.

 

[Ryan85]

Imo I think the Tamron is about 90% as good as canons. The canon is more durable, has faster auto focus, is a little sharper. The IS is a little better. ive heard some say with sigma and tamron that these zooms are a little shorter than the 200mm. I don't know haven't tested it. If you're on a budget or a hobbyiest I'd say go with the tamron it's a really good lens. If your not on as tight of a budget or want the absolute best 70-200 in the world then I'd get the canon version. Theres nothing wrong with the tamron and the 4 year warranty they offer opposed to canons 1 year is a nice bonus and should help make you feel at ease if you have any problems with it.

 

[Chisox2335]

Imo I think the Tamron is about 90% as good as canons. The canon is more durable, has faster auto focus, is a little sharper. The IS is a little better. ive heard some say with sigma and tamron that these zooms are a little shorter than the 200mm. I don't know haven't tested it. If you're on a budget or a hobbyiest I'd say go with the tamron it's a really good lens. If your not on as tight of a budget or want the absolute best 70-200 in the world then I'd get the canon version. Theres nothing wrong with the tamron and the 4 year warranty they offer opposed to canons 1 year is a nice bonus and should help make you feel at ease if you have any problems with it.

It's actually a 6 year warranty. I own it and I have found that it is soft at 200mm. I usually back it of just slightly. I also generally shoot at 4.0 because it's just that much sharper at 4.0 vs 2.8. Overall I've tsken some amazing pictures with it.

 

[Ryan85]

Imo I think the Tamron is about 90% as good as canons. The canon is more durable, has faster auto focus, is a little sharper. The IS is a little better. ive heard some say with sigma and tamron that these zooms are a little shorter than the 200mm. I don't know haven't tested it. If you're on a budget or a hobbyiest I'd say go with the tamron it's a really good lens. If your not on as tight of a budget or want the absolute best 70-200 in the world then I'd get the canon version. Theres nothing wrong with the tamron and the 4 year warranty they offer opposed to canons 1 year is a nice bonus and should help make you feel at ease if you have any problems with it.

It's actually a 6 year warranty. I own it and I have found that it is soft at 200mm. I usually back it of just slightly. I also generally shoot at 4.0 because it's just that much sharper at 4.0 vs 2.8. Overall I've tsken some amazing pictures with it.

Thank you for the correction

 

[bigdaddy]

Hello all,

Thanks for all the replies. I ordered one and it should get here tomorrow. I'll let you all know how it turns out.

Bigdaddy