Any Tamron 70-200 2.8 users?

S

shufflemoomin

Suspended / Banned
Messages
182
Edit My Images
No
Hello to everyone since I'm new to the forum.

As the topic says, does anyone here have any hands-on experience with this lens? Reviews seem to be generally favourable but most mention its poor AF performance. Can anyone with experience of the lens share their thoughts on it? To the best of my knowledge, there doesn't seem to be any real alternatives out there in this price range.
 
The Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX HSM II is in this price range. Very good IQ and superfast AF.

Not tried the Tamron but yes, it is supposed to be lacking on the AF front as its a micro motor type affair, rather than the hyper sonic or ultra sonic systems of the Sigma and Canon lenses.
 
Last edited:
The Sigma seems to be about £100+ more expensive, but if it has snappier AF than the Tamron, then the extra cost might be worth it to me.
 
shufflemoomin said:
The Sigma seems to be about £100+ more expensive, but if it has snappier AF than the Tamron, then the extra cost might be worth it to me.
Click to expand...

Yes but id still say it's in the Tamron price range. The alternative would be 1k plus for a Canon (new for new), which makes the Sigma a steal for the money.
 
I agree. I'll put the Sigma on the back burner depending on if anyone that has experience chimes in. In the agree with the negative views of the AF performance, then I'll happily investigate the Sigma. You've used the Sigma?
 
If AF speed is of the slightest consideration forget the Tamron, its worse than rubbish, any of the Sigma variations blow it out of the water, honestly mate, the Tammy AF speed is shocking.
 
Tokina do or did do a 70-200 f2.8 - I had one for a bit and both the IQ and the build were okay though it was pretty heavy ( I paid £150 for it on ebay so i wasnt going to be too fussy)

It was another micro motor affair so it did tend to hunt a bit in low light - but now more so than a lot of the non hsm sigma offerings
 
I have the Sigma 70-200 mkII, af speed is quick and its pretty sharp. Not as sharp as Canon L glass but for the price I'm more than happy with it.
 
Sad to hear confirmation of the crappy AF performance on the Tamron. AF performance in low light would be important. I shoot concerts and in the small venues I've been doing, the Tamron 17-50 2.8 has been invaluable, but in the near future, I'll be shooting larger stages and I just don't think 50mm on the far end is going to cut it. Having the AF hunt on the Tamron would be a disaster in that situation. So, to sum up, there's no positive views on the Tamron but something to be said for the Sigma, right?
 
to be honest in that sort of situation you might be better off looking for a second hand canon as the IS would be handy (and I dont think sigma make an OS version)
 
big soft moose said:
to be honest in that sort of situation you might be better off looking for a second hand canon as the IS would be handy (and I dont think sigma make an OS version)
Click to expand...

Sigma do make an OS version, but I don't think the OS would be much use for the op given what he shoots (concerts, moving subjects).
 
Last edited:
shufflemoomin said:
I agree. I'll put the Sigma on the back burner depending on if anyone that has experience chimes in. In the agree with the negative views of the AF performance, then I'll happily investigate the Sigma. You've used the Sigma?
Click to expand...

Yes I have the non OS mkII and it's a stunning lens.
 
odd jim said:
Sigma do make an OS version, but I don't think the OS would be much use for the op given what he shoots.
Click to expand...

Um why not ?

I would have though that gig photography is going to be a made to measure circumstance for stabilisation - given low light and thus relatively low shutter speeds, the need to hand hold, and the crampedness of shooting conditions making for less than ideal stance
 
shufflemoomin said:
IS would be useless for concerts. I'm shooting 1/125 or faster.
Click to expand...

If you say so - but I don't see it myself , even at 1/125 there's a good potential for camera shake - especially at the 200mm end
 
big soft moose said:
Um why not ?

I would have though that gig photography is going to be a made to measure circumstance for stabilisation - given low light and thus relatively low shutter speeds, the need to hand hold, and the crampedness of shooting conditions making for less than ideal stance
Click to expand...

I'm a big fan of IS / OS but for gig photography where the subjects are moving you'll still get motion blur...

Great for static objects in low light or panning, but for low light and moving subjects your best off with a fast lens and good high iso.
 
shufflemoomin said:
Interesting. Can you please supply a link to the exact model you're using to make sure I don't end up looking at a different version?
Click to expand...

I'm on the iPhone app at the mo but just google it or type it into amazon and it'll come up straight away.
 
I'm seeing "Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG Macro HSM II " and "Sigma 70-200mm, F2.8 II, APO EX DG MACRO HSM" I presume these are the same lens?
 
I use to own the Tamron 70-200mm which I found to be extremely sharp, as most reviewers confirm. However, ended up selling it due to the slow AF which was not good enough for anything that was not virtually stationery. Cannot understand why Tamron have not updated the AF to a sonic wave type as this would result an extremely good lens when combined with the existing optics.
Would not touch the Sigma as there seems to be massive variation in optical quality, and although there are suppose to be some good one out there the results I have seen have been less then impressive
 
gunther1966 said:
Would not touch the Sigma as there seems to be massive variation in optical quality, and although there are suppose to be some good one out there the results I have seen have been less then impressive
Click to expand...

To be fair, that's one thing I've heard from a few people about Sigma, but some swear by them. I have no experience with any of their lenses. Sadly, since I'm living in Denmark at the moment and I don't crap diamonds, I'll be ordering in from back home in the UK. No real chance to try a few to find a good copy and I'd rather avoid the hassle of shipping them back and forward to the UK. It's a bit of a quandary, that's for sure. Not sure what the best move is.
 
Yes, Tamron AF speed is nothing to write home about. If you need to capture moving subjects then this lenses isn't for you, for static use- such as posed portraits is passable. Optics are good, nothing outstanding, nor anything to write bad about. Frankly unless you get the third party alternatives for a very cheap price. I'll be inclined to save a bit more for 2nd hand OEM versions, both Nikon and Cannon IS/VR ver 1 lenses are very good.
 
I would agree with the used Canon, but all I'm seeing for 70-200 2.8 with them is the IS version. As I understand it, there is (was?) a non-IS version but I haven't had much luck on tracking one down. Even used, the 2.8 IS is going to be around double the price of the Tamron/Sigma alternatives.
 
Last edited:
I just sold my 70-200 f2.8 L ( non is) to get a sigma mkii.
For what I do (totally for my own pleasure) the IQ just isn't different enough.
I've used many versions of the sigma lens on canon & Nikon and all the ones I had have been excellent.
The older pre-macro versions (different pattern on the rubber coating on the rings is the easiest way to spot) although still hsm were slower and IMHO softer.

I went from a Nikon 80-200 af-s back to a sigma mki, and now back to the mkii from the canon.
If you get a good copy, in my opinion they are superb value for money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top