Tamron 70-200 /2.8

[kalster]

Getting very tempted to order this lens for my k10d, 699 is cheap for such a fast lens

seems to be available for pentax, nikon , sony and canon

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb...0mm+f%2F2.8+SP&x=0&y=0

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Wow, I had no idea that Tamron made a 70-200mm f/anything. Must be new, and I'm excited to read reviews on it. I huge problem (IMO) that I see with it is that like all Tamron lenses, it doesn't have any kind of supersonic focusing motor, something that I couldn't live without on a telephoto.

 

[alfa147x]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Wow, I had no idea that Tamron made a 70-200mm f/anything. Must be new, and I'm excited to read reviews on it. I huge problem (IMO) that I see with it is that like all Tamron lenses, it doesn't have any kind of supersonic focusing motor, something that I couldn't live without on a telephoto.

after using one that is what i regret the most
but i dont have a high budget ....

 

[kalster]

yeh , lack of HSM/USM is not great, but its supposedly lighter than the Sigma and Canon equivalent, also keeps the cost down I guess, waiting for the photozone review

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Well, as far as Canon stuff is concerned, you can get a used 70-200mm f/4 USM that is very light for $500 all the time. I've seen the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 HSM go for around $700-$800 used.

The lack of HSM/USM is a deal killed for me, I think no matter how sharp it would be. I've used 3 Tamron lenses in my time, and the AF can be absolutely infuriating. There is nothing more irritating than it missing focus, then having to do a full "focus in and out" cycle with its slow slow motor to get back on the subject. This would be close to un-usable for tracking anything that's moving, which any telephoto has a very high chance of eventually having to do. I think what Tamron should have done is probably gone for a constant aperture f/4 ultrawide like 10-24mm or 10-18mm or something, and made it tack sharp. I would think that an ultrawide wouldn't be hampered nearly as much by their traditional focusing motors.

 

[ElFenix]

interesting that slrgear says they added it to their database back last march, yet i never noticed it. hasn't been reviewed there either.

weight: 2.5 lbs
canon f/2.8: 2.9 lbs
canon f/2.8 IS: 3.2 lbs
nikon f/2.8 VR: 3.2 lbs
nikon 80-200: 2.9 lbs
sigma f/2.8: 3.0 lbs (the new macro II version)
tokina 80-200: 3.0 lbs (if you can find one)
sony f/2.8: 3.0

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Well, as far as Canon stuff is concerned, you can get a used 70-200mm f/4 USM that is very light for $500 all the time. I've seen the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 HSM go for around $700-$800 used.

The lack of HSM/USM is a deal killed for me, I think no matter how sharp it would be. I've used 3 Tamron lenses in my time, and the AF can be absolutely infuriating. .

I love the picture quality of my tamron 17-50.... but the autofocus noise is unreal. And it really likes to hunt in lower light. So I could not live without the USM either. I have a 70-200 Canon and the motor is so fast and quiet.

 

[corkyg]

It is reviewed here:

Tamron

On the plus side, it is a DI lens - I have had very good luck with an XR DI with a 20D.

 

[ElFenix]

after trying to take handheld pictures of mockingbirds at 210 mm i think i need IS more than a sonic motor.


of course, i'd also like something that can resolve the rings of saturn, or at least jupiter's moons.

 

[foghorn67]

NO USM/HSM kills it for me as well. I bought my Sigma 70-200 2.8 HSM for 500 used.
And they could have at least put a focus limiter on it, something the Sigma's lack.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: foghorn67
NO USM/HSM kills it for me as well. I bought my Sigma 70-200 2.8 HSM for 500 used.
And they could have at least put a focus limiter on it, something the Sigma's lack.

If the screwdrive AF is of the same calibre as my Maxxum 7 then I personally don't see a need for USM/SWM/HSM/SSM. My old Sigma 70-200 EX f/2.8 snaps into focus right now on the Maxxum 7, and it's quite usable on the A100. I'm eager to see how the A700 does with it. I should know next week.

ZV

 

[Heidfirst]

indeed, it's possible for a good screw drive (Maxxum 7, A700 possibly A200) to outperform the cheaper (micro motor) versions of USM/HSM etc.
It will be noisier but just as fast/faster.

 

[foghorn67]

Originally posted by: Heidfirst
indeed, it's possible for a good screw drive (Maxxum 7, A700 possibly A200) to outperform the cheaper (micro motor) versions of USM/HSM etc.
It will be noisier but just as fast/faster.

The USM/HSM motors on the Canon's and Sigma's (70-200's) aren't cheap. This is irrelevent anyway.

 

[tdawg]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Wow, I had no idea that Tamron made a 70-200mm f/anything. Must be new, and I'm excited to read reviews on it. I huge problem (IMO) that I see with it is that like all Tamron lenses, it doesn't have any kind of supersonic focusing motor, something that I couldn't live without on a telephoto.

This is what's weird to me. From Tamron's website:

Nikon - Coming Soon - please check back
(with Built-In Motor for use with all Nikon DSLR cameras)*

*emphasis added

With a statement like that, you'd think they came up with a lens mounted motor, if they're claiming it will AF on the D40/x. If that's the case though, you'd figure they'd make a big deal about it and offer it in versions for other mounts (at least Canon). Whatever the case, it's a very cloudy statement.

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: foghorn67
The USM/HSM motors on the Canon's and Sigma's (70-200's) aren't cheap.

It was a general comment, 70-200 wasn't actually specified in my post.
the micro motor versions of USM etc. are cheaper & inferior compared to ring.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: tdawg

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Wow, I had no idea that Tamron made a 70-200mm f/anything. Must be new, and I'm excited to read reviews on it. I huge problem (IMO) that I see with it is that like all Tamron lenses, it doesn't have any kind of supersonic focusing motor, something that I couldn't live without on a telephoto.

This is what's weird to me. From Tamron's website:

Nikon - Coming Soon - please check back
(with Built-In Motor for use with all Nikon DSLR cameras)*

*emphasis added

With a statement like that, you'd think they came up with a lens mounted motor, if they're claiming it will AF on the D40/x. If that's the case though, you'd figure they'd make a big deal about it and offer it in versions for other mounts (at least Canon). Whatever the case, it's a very cloudy statement.

you would think that. But look at sigma, they have a whole slew of new HSM driven lenses for Nikon... yet they don't just bring it over to other systems too. Instead they have yet another line, and possible confusion. Granted, I have no idea how simple/difficult it would be to just do that... heh.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: randomlinh

you would think that. But look at sigma, they have a whole slew of new HSM driven lenses for Nikon... yet they don't just bring it over to other systems too. Instead they have yet another line, and possible confusion. Granted, I have no idea how simple/difficult it would be to just do that... heh.

i honestly can't figure out why sigma would include image stabilization but not sonic motors on their 80-400. $1000+ lenses simply have no excuse for not using sonic motors (especially long telephoto lenses). it's not like it's available in mounts that don't support in-lens motors. are there really that many old nikons in use anymore?