Reading mode: Light Dark

Why THOSE Lenses -- Here's why (with photos)

Go to last post
Peru_Photog said:
But my views are not one-sided.

I have shot EOS fim/digital for 12 years now.

And for the first 10 years, I used mostly Sigma, Tamron lenses.

Two years ago I got fed up. It was only after 10 years of being
stubborn and thinking Canon lenses (L or otherwise) are overrated,
that I finally saw the light (literally).

Just a few months ago, I finished rennovating my kit with all Canon
items, and the quality of my images have increased, for sure.

I still hold open the possability, and welcome the day when the 3rd
parties can finally provide consistent high quality products that
can more often then now, really give Canon a bad time, matching,
and preferably beating Canon quality more then is the case today.
Click to expand...
I don't see Canon as the King either, because consistency has not been their strong suit (in providing high quality lenses, even Ls).

You have had a different experience and made difference choices -- that certainly doesn't make your statement that "all Ls are the best" a fact. Some pros and non-pros alike will (and do) disagree, and some agree with you.

What I don't understand is why you are so insistent that you are right here, when I've said several times that my post was not about comparisons, just about quality. If you don't agree, fine, then don't buy the lenses I've chosen.

Amy
--

Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.



http://www.nyphotos.net ~ http://www.something-fishy.com/photography
 
Peru_Photog said:
Everyone says the following too often:
"You can alwasy photo-shop the picture to do blah,blah, blah".
Click to expand...
Well I didn't. What I said regarding contrast was the if I were dissatified with it I COULD change it, either in the camera itself or in post-processing.
Peru_Photog said:
Sure, often at the cost of beating up pixels, introducing
artifacts, etc.
Click to expand...
Everyone agrees on that. But everyone also agrees that MOST shots out of a Canon DSLR, regardless of which body or lens, require post processing.
Peru_Photog said:
It's always better to get the shot as close to right as possible at
the time the image is taken.
Click to expand...
Yup, and always my goal.
Peru_Photog said:
Too often, photos have that beat up "Photo-Shopped" look.
Click to expand...
Can't blame the lens for that.
Peru_Photog said:
Better to get the contrast right on, or very near right on with a
great lens. To rely so much of PS is to down grade the quality,
introduce problems.
Click to expand...
Which I do. PS is the last thing I want to "rely" on.
Peru_Photog said:
This is not to suggest that images never need post-processing. I
only shot RAW so all my work is post-processed, but even though, I
still stive to get the shot right, the lighting right, and one of
the things I do to get this done is to use the best lenses
available for Canon mount.
Click to expand...
No one said otherwise. Your choice of what is "best" just happens to be Canon L lense. Not everyone agrees.

The Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 gets shining reviews from pros and non-pros, including in the contrast department, the color department, and in the sharpness and sharpness to the edge department. You don't have to agree, but you shouldn't just dismiss it either.

Amy
--

Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.



http://www.nyphotos.net ~ http://www.something-fishy.com/photography
 
This is a fantastic lens! I wouldn't return it... such a beautiful lens, and it's just too valuable for indoor photography to give up. f/2.8 just doesn't cut it in most of those situations.
--
'The camera should become an extension of your eye, nothing else.' --Ernst Haas
 
Thanks for the input Qualia. There are definitely "sacrifices" (like no USM) you make with the Tamron. I do have some lenses with USM and can feel the difference, but without a doubt I don't think the Tamron is a slow performer (focusing) either. I'm sure you and I agree USM is nicer, but the Tamron is no shabby performer.

And I agree... some will always disagree and that's okay. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion. I wish it was as simple as "L is always best" but it's not such a cut and dry answer. Depends on your needs and shooting style for sure. Especially in a case like this.

BOTH are good performing lenses. If budget is an issue, a $1000 lens may not be an option. If you do weddings and will be out in the rain often, having something not weather-sealed may not be an option. If you prefer slightly warmer colors, the Tamron may tickle your fancy. If you only want lenses with USM Canon is the only option. ... and so on.

But BOTH get good color, contrast and sharpness -- if going head to head for picture quality it's not always clear who wins... which is fine - everyone can make up their own minds.

Amy
--

Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.



http://www.nyphotos.net ~ http://www.something-fishy.com/photography
 
Peru_Photog said:
Re: I have...was not impressed when Wide Open nt
Click to expand...
Dude, I think now you're arguing for the sake of it.

These were without any effort whatsoever. Simply walked out my back door 5 minutes ago and took them.

Staight from the cam, ZERO post-processing.

ISO 200, 1/640, f/2.8 (wide open) 17mm



100% crop



No, not a great subject, but like I said, little effort.. .and with the texture on the chair you can see there are clearly no problems wide open.

Amy
--

Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.



http://www.nyphotos.net ~ http://www.something-fishy.com/photography
 
SFishy said:
Thanks for the input Qualia. There are definitely "sacrifices"
(like no USM) you make with the Tamron. I do have some lenses with
Click to expand...
There are definitely sacrifices one makes with the more expensive lens too. It's much heavier and more conspicuous, for instance. I love being able to walk around the city with a lighter, smaller lens.
SFishy said:
USM and can feel the difference, but without a doubt I don't think
the Tamron is a slow performer (focusing) either. I'm sure you and
I agree USM is nicer, but the Tamron is no shabby performer.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think the Tamron is a poor performer, not at all. I don't want to give anyone that impression if they're thinking of buying the lens. There have been a few times where speed was critical that I felt I missed a shot I would have gotten with the slight speed advantage from the canon lens. But for most of what I do this is not an issue at all.
SFishy said:
And I agree... some will always disagree and that's okay.
Everyone's entitled to their own opinion. I wish it was as simple
as "L is always best" but it's not such a cut and dry answer.
Depends on your needs and shooting style for sure. Especially in a
case like this.
Click to expand...
Absolutely!

--
'The camera should become an extension of your eye, nothing else.' --Ernst Haas
 
qualia said:
There are definitely sacrifices one makes with the more expensive
lens too. It's much heavier and more conspicuous, for instance. I
love being able to walk around the city with a lighter, smaller
lens.
Click to expand...
Yup, totally agree (as you probably read in my "in conclusion" reply - weight is a issue for me, not a big one, but if it's lighten I enjoy it more). I NEVER think twice about carrying my 28-75 or 17-35 when it comes to size or weight cause it's SO not an issue.
qualia said:
qualia said:
I agree USM is nicer, but the Tamron is no shabby performer.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think the Tamron is a poor performer, not at all. I
don't want to give anyone that impression if they're thinking of
buying the lens. There have been a few times where speed was
critical that I felt I missed a shot I would have gotten with the
slight speed advantage from the canon lens. But for most of what I
do this is not an issue at all.
Click to expand...
I'd be curious to hear where it's been an issue for you -- not because I don't believe you, but just because I haven't run into it. I also don't do a lot of high fps shooting, nor do I use AI Servo a lot, but when I have (like for tracking flying birds) I haven't had a problem. Do you think it's the Tamron specifically, or might you have had the same issue with any other brand (even with USM)? Trust me, I don't pretend the Tamron is some perfect "fell-from-heaven" lens, I'm honestly just curious. Always good to know all the ups and downs :)

Amy
--

Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.



http://www.nyphotos.net ~ http://www.something-fishy.com/photography
 
it doesn't make you more believable. The #s speak for themselves and you were the one to bring up Mercedes vs. Hyundai. Like I said, and like the JD Powers & Associates rating show, Mercedes is NOT always better than Hyundai just because it's a Mercedes.

And if you'd like some more comparisons here ya go. The only car that put up a good fight with the Hyundai was the BMW, and that was still pretty darn close considering the price difference.

http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/comparison/results.html?carid0=16059&carid1=15232&carid2=14828&carid3=16386&pagetitle=reliability

Amy
--

Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.



http://www.nyphotos.net ~ http://www.something-fishy.com/photography
 
SFishy said:
it doesn't make you more believable. The #s speak for themselves
and you were the one to bring up Mercedes vs. Hyundai. Like I said,
and like the JD Powers & Associates rating show, Mercedes is NOT
always better than Hyundai just because it's a Mercedes.

And if you'd like some more comparisons here ya go. The only car
that put up a good fight with the Hyundai was the BMW, and that was
still pretty darn close considering the price difference.
Click to expand...
I don't think you have chosen a good analogy. JD Powers shows customer satisfaction - not objective performance. That's not unlike taking ratings from DPReview at face value - the pocket Casio 750 is rated Recommended, the very advanced DSLR Fujifilm S3 Pro - Above Average (a step down) - does that mean that Casio really tops the S3 Pro?

This is competely different from this discussion, since, in your (and many others') assessment the Tamron is equal with the 24-70 in image quality. Few would argue that the Hyundai Sonata equals the $70K Mercedes in performance.
--
Misha
 
misha said:
I don't think you have chosen a good analogy. JD Powers shows
customer satisfaction - not objective performance. That's not
unlike taking ratings from DPReview at face value - the pocket
Casio 750 is rated Recommended, the very advanced DSLR Fujifilm S3
Pro - Above Average (a step down) - does that mean that Casio
really tops the S3 Pro?
Click to expand...
First, I didn't choose the analogy, Peru did. He was the one to make the sweeping statement that Mercedes is always better than Hyundai.

Now I dug for MORE research. Everywhere I went I could not get a review on the Hyundai, so I did a comparison of expert reviews on the Toyota Camry ($20K) vs. the Mercedes SL 65 ($170K)

Guess which got a better EXPERT review.

I also threw in the Mercedes C class Luxury sedan (40K). Guess which STILL got a better review?

http://autos.msn.com/research/compare/default.aspx?src=compare&c=0&n=3&i=0&tb=0&ph1=t0&ph2=t0&dt=0&v=t99556&v=t99543&v=t99174
Member said:
This is competely different from this discussion, since, in your
(and many others') assessment the Tamron is equal with the 24-70 in
image quality. Few would argue that the Hyundai Sonata equals the
$70K Mercedes in performance.
Click to expand...
Which is completely besides the point. An inexpensive car can still be a good and nice car. No one doubts that many people like and want a Mercedes -- but just because it's a Mercedes that doesn't mean it won't do the job, and do it well.

The point is, just because the Tamron isn't L (which it couldn't be anyway since it's not made by Canon), doesn't mean it can't do the job and do it well, or even as good as the 24-70 (talking image quality). Will it be weather sealed? Nope. But some people don't need that. Will the Canon be small and light? Nope. But some don't care. Talking about taking good pictures, both are well beyond capable, based on USER reviews, pros and amateurs, and based on EXPERT reviews.

Now lets get off the CAR THING already, please. I've made my point over and over.

Amy
--

Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.



http://www.nyphotos.net ~ http://www.something-fishy.com/photography
 
SFishy said:
I'd be curious to hear where it's been an issue for you -- not
because I don't believe you, but just because I haven't run into
it. I also don't do a lot of high fps shooting, nor do I use AI
Servo a lot, but when I have (like for tracking flying birds) I
haven't had a problem. Do you think it's the Tamron specifically,
or might you have had the same issue with any other brand (even
with USM)? Trust me, I don't pretend the Tamron is some perfect
"fell-from-heaven" lens, I'm honestly just curious. Always good to
know all the ups and downs :)
Click to expand...
Hey Amy,

My husband and I went out shooting butterflies and bees in a field of wildflowers recently. I had my tamron 90mm macro and my 28-75 with me, and I didn't do very well in this situation with those lenses. This style of shooting is defnitely out of my zone of comfort. I'm not a wildlife photographer so I don't have a lot of experience anticipating fast moving subjects. So yeah, it's quite possible I would have done just as badly if I had been using a lens with a faster motor that day. But my feeling from other experiences is that when you're trying to lock on to a very quick and slippery critter, the slight speed advantage isn't just a luxury, it really does make a difference. One might not notice much of a difference in normal shooting, but in a tricky situation it might get you some shots you might have otherwise missed. I'd definitely rather have the canon USM if speed (or silence) were an issue for me. My husband shoots wildlife a lot and I doubt he would give up the USM for anything. For me, since speed is not usually an issue I like the optics and weight of my tamrons and am not going to lose any sleep over a few missed bee shots. :)

By the way, I enjoyed your gallery. Where did you take those coastal photos? The "dream of flight" is a great capture. Some of mine are here: http://chiaroscuro.baltiblogs.com/favorites.html
 
qualia said:
My husband and I went out shooting butterflies and bees in a field
of wildflowers recently. I had my tamron 90mm macro and my 28-75
with me, and I didn't do very well in this situation with those
lenses. This style of shooting is defnitely out of my zone of
comfort. I'm not a wildlife photographer so I don't have a lot of
experience anticipating fast moving subjects. So yeah, it's quite
possible I would have done just as badly if I had been using a lens
with a faster motor that day. But my feeling from other
experiences is that when you're trying to lock on to a very quick
and slippery critter, the slight speed advantage isn't just a
luxury, it really does make a difference. One might not notice
much of a difference in normal shooting, but in a tricky situation
it might get you some shots you might have otherwise missed. I'd
definitely rather have the canon USM if speed (or silence) were an
issue for me. My husband shoots wildlife a lot and I doubt he
would give up the USM for anything. For me, since speed is not
usually an issue I like the optics and weight of my tamrons and am
not going to lose any sleep over a few missed bee shots. :)
Click to expand...
Hi Qualia,

I hear what you're saying. I don't do wildlife to know how much a difference it really makes. I've done a few tracking shots and haven't had much problem...



Most of my flying gulls were done with the Tamron (I think all of them actually)... but admittedly, soaring goals aren't as fast moving as bees.

My aunt is into photography and we went to visit her a while back. It was her very first time picking up the 20D (coming from a P&S)... she took this shot, not even in AI servo mode (and humming birds are fast). It's not a great shot, but for a first-timer?



Could be that the percentage of "missed shots" increases without the USM, but I certainly can't argue it -- nor do I want to. USM is definitely a nice thing on the Canon lenses, but of course you don't need an L to get it. I haven't quite missed it with the Tamron, but then again I'm not a wildlife shooter typically.
qualia said:
By the way, I enjoyed your gallery. Where did you take those
coastal photos? The "dream of flight" is a great capture. Some of
mine are here: http://chiaroscuro.baltiblogs.com/favorites.html
Click to expand...
I LOVE you shots... I took a quick look and will definitely check it out more. The colors and composition are fabulous!

Most of my shots are taken around Long Island and New York City :)

Amy
--

Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.



http://www.nyphotos.net ~ http://www.something-fishy.com/photography
 
SFishy said:
My aunt is into photography and we went to visit her a while back.
It was her very first time picking up the 20D (coming from a
P&S)... she took this shot, not even in AI servo mode (and humming
birds are fast). It's not a great shot, but for a first-timer?
Click to expand...
I'll bet she wants a 20d now. :)
SFishy said:
I LOVE you shots... I took a quick look and will definitely check
it out more. The colors and composition are fabulous!
Click to expand...
Thanks! None of those are from the tamron, which I only got last month. I can't wait to take some autumn foliage shots with it.
SFishy said:
Most of my shots are taken around Long Island and New York City :)
Click to expand...
I've visited nyc a few times and it is one of my favorite places for photography. Happy shooting!
 
qualia said:
I'll bet she wants a 20d now. :)
Click to expand...
Absolutely! She'd buy one tomorrow if she had the money. She's on a very tight budget unfortunately.
qualia said:
Thanks! None of those are from the tamron, which I only got last
month. I can't wait to take some autumn foliage shots with it.
Click to expand...
Me too! I'm looking forward to the colors changing... This will be my first fall with the 20D :)
qualia said:
I've visited nyc a few times and it is one of my favorite places
for photography. Happy shooting!
Click to expand...
We love it... great scenes, lots of diversity and good for finding those interesting characters, like Wendell...



He's charged me $2.00 to take his picture... LOL

Amy
--

Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.



http://www.nyphotos.net ~ http://www.something-fishy.com/photography
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top