Reading mode: Light Dark

Tamron 70-200 f2.8 - your experience?

Go to last post
A

ArmandN

Well-known member
Messages
224
Reaction score
0
Location
Sibiu, US
I'm considering buying a Tamron 70-200 f2.8; it would br my biggest purchase, so I need to be sure of any downsides.

Reading the reviews, one common theme was improper focus.

What's your experience wit this lens regarding image quality and focus performance (speed & accuracy)? What are you using it for?
 
Aloha!

I just acquired this lens last week.

Initial impressions:

1. Heavy compared to my Tamron 28-75 2.8 lens, but reportedly lighter then all 70-200 2.8 lenses.
2. Silky smooth zoom and focus rings.

3. Sometimes hunts in low light situations. In one case it hopped back and forth 4 times before acquiring a lock. Not overly common, but something to think about if your type of photography doesn't allow for second chances.

4. On my a850, it feels very manly. Not sure why... but I feel like I'm carrying a weapon instead of a camera.
5. Very happy with the purchase, the colors are great - and it is damn sharp.
 
I bought my Tamron 70200 with Tamron 2875 and Tamron 90 and A850..

Tamron 70200 is perfectly suitable for its role.. I have been using it for mainly portrait and fashion works.. ( for sport photo D700 and 70200VR2 would be better for sure )

Please note it is not suitable for street photpgraphy - 2875 is very good for this kind of work - but it is excellent for any kind of fashing, portrait works..Very sharp, very limited depth of field, nice bokeh, excellent colour.

If you like very short distance portrait , it makes a very good combo with Canon 500D.

One of my best decision to buy above kit. This kit will be complete with either CZ1635 or Tokina 1628 ( to be introduced soon ).

Omer
 
jurado said:
2. Silky smooth zoom and focus rings.
Click to expand...
Yes! That's one thing I really liked also. The diameter of the zoom ring was small, and the zoom action was fast and smooth. Unlike the Sigma which felt very big and cumbersome. Man I really hate how Sigmas are built.

--
-Davie T

 
It is my most expensive purchase to date. It is also my favorite lens. AF can hunt through range at times especially in lower light. It is sharp with great bokeh. I use it for portraits a lot. It can be used for sports though. I use it on a a300. It is a great value for its price point no doubt.
 
I have one on the way next week and will compare it to the Sony 70-300G.

While the extra reach of the 70-300 is nice I expect the 2.8 will be much more useful to me (as the 70-300 is 4.5-5.6).

I'll decide between them then probably sell one or the other. My copy of the 70-300 has some zoom creep so it would probably sell under market a bit though I'm expecting that's the one that will go...

As I understand it the Tammy should only really hunt in lower light situations where many lenses hunt regardless. Ultimately I chose it over the Sigma equivalent as the Sigs seems to have some QC and build issues I didn't want to have to deal with. (Not all but some).
--
  • Karen
http://www.karenengelphotography.com
 
I love mine, and you are right, at times my camera does hunt for focus with it, but not much more than it would with any other lens in the same situation. It has trouble finding focus when there is little definition or obvious lines to lock on to. In low light, I am learning more and more to just manual focus but thats really a good thing I think, it just takes practice. As others have stated, it is very sharp, and I think it competes amazingly well to other 70-200 options especially considering its price.

Its great for people, I shoot musicians and speakers on stage frequently and I love the shots I can get with this lens. The low F2.8 means that you can use this lens in low light situations where other zooms are practically useless. Its also very comfortable to hold and use, the focus ring is very stable, has the right resistance for manual focusing.

Its probably my favorite lens at the moment.

Greg
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gkemp/
 
1) image quality - excellent. Sharp + nice colors.

2) Focus speed - hmm, depend on camera body. On my A200, the focus is very good when there is enough light.

But when lighting is bad, most lens hunts right?

The lack of focus delimiter (sony's 70-200 has one) makes the hunting often during low light situation. But do you really need to pay extra price for the extra button?

3) Focus accuracy - it is accurate for sure, cos it gives me sharp pictures.

I have never tried sony's, but tamron gives me what I need at the price I could afford.
 
digitalshooter said:
Re: Buy once buy right buy Sony 70-200 (nt)
Click to expand...
I encourage everyone with deep pockets to do so. It'll keep Sony happy and assure that the a-mount lives on. If I had the green and this were a job rather then a hobby - I'd shoot the Sony for certain.

However, at 1000 US less backed by a six year warranty - I'm willing to compromise with the Tamron. Not that its a bad lens at all.
 
Why?

In every single review I have ever read the Sony doesnt compete with the Tamron optically. Its not as sharp at any aperture, and it gets crushed wide open. Its also double the price, heavier, and stands out like a sore thumb in a crowd. Being that the goal of a good lens is to get excellent image quality why would you pay twice as much for a lens that isnt as good?

Having had the Tamron for a short amount of time I found it perfectly acceptable speed wise. It was no slower than the 70-300G, and is a lot faster than the beercan.
digitalshooter said:
--
Thanks,

Digitalshooter
Click to expand...
--

Sony a500 - Sony 50/1.8 - Zeiss 16-80 - Sony 70-300G - extension tubes - Kenko teleplus300 1.4TC - HVL42 (x2)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lylegenykphotography/
 
i love it.. on my a700, it does hunt when using outer af points more than I think it should, but not enough to worry about unless you are shooting some fast sports. IQ is amazing, and it is my goto lens along with my tamron 17-50 to cover 99% of what I need in focal lengths. If you shoot shallow aperature and background has alot of circular objects, the bokeh isnt as pretty as some of the more expensive lenses (looks alot like a mirror lens bokeh), but shoot it wide open and at min focus distance, it does smooth out really well.
 
Lyle From Canada said:
In every single review I have ever read the Sony doesnt compete with the Tamron optically. Its not as sharp at any aperture, and it gets crushed wide open.
Click to expand...
This is absolute nonsense (the reviews, not you stating that the reviews exist).

They must have had bad samples* all the way around. The Tamron is not even in the same league as (a good sample) of the 70200G in terms of wide open sharpness. IQ, ...you name it.

But the Tamron is priced accordingly, so you get what you pay for and there's nothing wrong with that.
  • When buying a lens at this price range, you'd be crazy not to actually test a few samples of the lens before buying. You can't buy sight unseen through the mail.
 
I have this lens, and it's awesome. Super sharp plus incredible bokeh. Don't worry about autofocus; the negative press is about the motor in other mount versions. The alpha mount version uses the camera's AF motor, and therefore is as good as a typical Sony lens. It may not be impressive, but there's nothing to complain about, either.

And it's so inexpensive (relatively speaking). IMHO, this is probably the best lens deal out there!
 
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