Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
next PZ lens test report: Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 SP Di VC USD
#1
About as good as the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 USM IS:

[url="http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/583-tamron70300f456eosff"]http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/583-tamron70300f456eosff[/url]
#2
Many thanks for the review.

As usual the review matches my experience with this lens.

I don’t have canon 70-300 IS to compare them.

This lens actually matches and even exceeds my expectations.

Just to cool off some superlative that flies on Internet.

- the reproduction of small details /read it high frequencies/ are far bellow my two macros. Tokina 100 and Sigma 150Macro

- the contrast is really impressive. Maybe that is why the lens receives a lot of “Wow”, ” Superb” and “outstanding” comments in internet.

- flare control is similar to my Tamron 17-50. However the two lenses has different FL.

- color reproduction and rendering is similar to my Tamron 17-50





Klaus, I have one question. Did you try this lens at tripod?



I found this lens too heavy in front. Finally I solve this problem with one home made anodized aluminum plate. Now the camera quick release is located at centre of gravity.













Thanks in advance

Miro
#3
[quote name='miro' timestamp='1297420140' post='6057']

Many thanks for the review.

As usual the review matches my experience with this lens.

I don’t have canon 70-300 IS to compare them.

This lens actually matches and even exceeds my expectations.

Just to cool off some superlative that flies on Internet.

- the reproduction of small details /read it high frequencies/ are far bellow my two macros. Tokina 100 and Sigma 150Macro

- the contrast is really impressive. Maybe that is why the lens receives a lot of “Wow”, ” Superb” and “outstanding” comments in internet.

- flare control is similar to my Tamron 17-50. However the two lenses has different FL.

- color reproduction and rendering is similar to my Tamron 17-50





Klaus, I have one question. Did you try this lens at tripod?



I found this lens too heavy in front. Finally I solve this problem with one home made anodized aluminum plate. Now the camera quick release is located at centre of gravity.



Thanks in advance

Miro

[/quote]



Well, the tests are tripod-based, of course. :-) My plate has a "front screw" which can be used as secondary stabilizer so I don't run into this issue
#4
Thanks for the review. Good to hear that the contrast at the long end is quite good. That's a thing that bugged me with the other cheap teles I've tried.



Is an APS-C test planned?
#5
[quote name='sth' timestamp='1297429999' post='6061']

Thanks for the review. Good to hear that the contrast at the long end is quite good. That's a thing that bugged me with the other cheap teles I've tried.



Is an APS-C test planned?

[/quote]



Yep. Either - should be up either this evening or tomorrow.
#6
The sample images don't look that hot; they look a lot like the images I took with 1.4x + 70-200.



Given that this lens is the 'same' optical quality as the canon and the same price why pick one over the other?



(btw not really related but i've been fairly happy with the 15-85 which seems to resolve alot more details)
#7
[quote name='you2' timestamp='1297460957' post='6066']

The sample images don't look that hot; they look a lot like the images I took with 1.4x + 70-200.[/quote]

Which 70-200? It would be great if this lens performed like the Canon 70-200 f/4 IS + 1.4x Extender, but of course it doesn't.





[quote name='you2' timestamp='1297460957' post='6066']Given that this lens is the 'same' optical quality as the canon and the same price why pick one over the other?[/quote]

- Ultrasonic motor with full-time manual focus

- Non-rotating front element

- Better build quality





[quote name='you2' timestamp='1297460957' post='6066'](btw not really related but i've been fairly happy with the 15-85 which seems to resolve alot more details)[/quote]

...and the 60mm macro is even sharper and cheaper. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Wink' />

The 15-85 is great and I also highly recommend it, but things aren't as simple for "affordable" tele lenses.



You can go for a 70-200 but it'll cost a thousand bucks if you want IS (which most people want). The cheaper lenses (70-300 IS, even the 55-250) aren't particularly bad optically (not great either, though), but they have other shortcomings, mainly in the construction: Rotating filters, no ring-USM, wobbly inner lens tube on some samples of the 70-300 IS, etc.



That's what makes the Tamron so interesting. Same optical quality as the 70-300 IS but with better construction for the same price sounds like a good deal to me.
#8
Add to Canon price the lens hood and decent lens cap.



Maybe tamron has better resistance against flare/glare.



I'd like to ask your question other way around.

What canon offers more that Tamron?

Maybe speculative compatibilty issues???? However I only know positive reaction for Tamrons with canon bodies. As far as I know tamron had the specification of EF mount unofficially.





Personally I prefer to walk with 70-300 + 100 Macro than single 70-200/2,8 + TC.

The two sets are equally heavy.





PS: My opinion is a little bit biased toward tamron.

My tamron 17-50 non VC survive 2 drops from tripods to the ground. The lens is still in perfect mechanical and optical condition.
#9
Why possibly go for Canon over the Tamron?



Some body support for lens corrections.

DPP supported lens corrections.

Zoom direction matches other Canon lenses. <-- this would be the biggest one for me!

From the images, does the Tamron put the zoom ring at the front of the lens?

Canon has more IS settings.



Personally I don't have any issue with Canon lens caps. Sure they don't have the centre pinch but they're thinner for it and still easy to fit/remove. Can't argue with them being stingy on the lens hood though.



If I was still on the Sony system, I think the Tamron would make an interesting affordable alternative to the 70-300G.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
#10
[quote name='popo' timestamp='1297505657' post='6070']

Zoom direction matches other Canon lenses. <-- this would be the biggest one for me![/quote]

I don't know how much of a problem this will be. I've tried the prototype at Photokina last year and didn't even notice it at first.





[quote name='popo' timestamp='1297505657' post='6070']

From the images, does the Tamron put the zoom ring at the front of the lens?[/quote]

Yes.





[quote name='popo' timestamp='1297505657' post='6070']

Canon has more IS settings.[/quote]

The Tamron is supposed to have automatic panning detection but I guess I'll have to try out how effective it really is.
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)