Tamron AF 70-300mm 4-5.6 Di SP VC USD

G

giraffenschubser

Guest
Hey there,

I was recently thinking of expanding my photographic range in terms of a tele lens. First I dreamt of the white 70-300 by Canon, because it seems to be a quite nice compromise in that league. But then I heard that the Tamron AF 70-300mm 4-5.6 Di SP VC USD is supposed to deliver kind of the same image quality, also contains a 4-stop image stabilizer, has nice coatings and a fast AF at 1/3 or 1/4 of the price of the Canon L lens. Does anyone have any experience with this lens?

PS: it would mate with a 7D and have the 24-105L and the 50mm 1.4 as smaller brothers, if it became mine :)
 

foobar

EOS 90D
Jul 21, 2010
109
0
On paper, these lenses look almost the same, but the Tamron sadly isn't as big a bargain as I would have hoped.
If you're going to shoot a lot of moving subjects, don't get the Tamron. The AF of that lens isn't really great for that – I had more keepers with even the 55-250IS in those situations.

But, all in all, the Tamron is not a bad lens for the price. Try both (like I did), and you certainly know why the Canon 70-300L is more expensive. The Canon really plays in a different league when it comes to image quality and autofocus (and of course, it's also weather resistant and its zoom ring turns in the right direction ;) ).

If you have ever tried a 70-200L f/4 IS: The 70-300L performs very similar.

[edit]: I also use a 7D.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,708
2,696
67
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
I also own the Tamron 70-300mm. I don't have the "L" lens to compare it too. I've lusted after the Canon 70-300mm L, but just haven't been able to justify the expense. (I decided to buy the 100-400mm Canon zoom for now, instead, and keep the Tamron).

I would say the Tamron is sharp (compares favorably to the 100-400 and the 55-250 -- which by the way is a pretty dang sharp lens), whether or not it is as sharp at the "L" lens I doubt (although some reviews have said the "L" is not knock-your-socks-off sharp -- like the 70-200 2.8 L.)

I have found the Tamron sometimes (but not often) will have a hard time finding a focus point (does a lot of searching).

My sense is the Tamron is superior to the non-L Canon 70-300 mm IS (and cheaper) but not in the same league as the "L."

If you want some good insights into the various options, take a look at the Lens Rentals commentary for each lens. I think his comments are right on.
 
G

giraffenschubser

Guest
Thanks for the replies!

I guess I'm gonna try both of them and decide afterwards... a collegue of mine owns the Tamron (and I yet have to find someone near me owning the Canon L :) ) and then I'll decide... But I'm probably going for the Tamron, due to the fact that I'm neither a professional nor a millionaire :)