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

[giraffenschubser]

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]

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]

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.

 

[giraffenschubser]

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