dougdarter
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,099
- Name
- Douglas
- Edit My Images
- Yes
My son is off to Iceland in a day or so, and I've loaned him my 10D. He wanted to borrow my 70 - 210L
He has previous for damaging my kit before, so I advertised in the 'wants' for a cheap telezoom. 'Sepulchre' came up trumps with a mint - looks like new,Tamron EF 55-200 Di II LD.
I have read a lot of disparaging reports of these cheap little lenses, so I have decided to redress the balance a little. In fact this lens left me wondering if the 'reviewers' actually test the lens at all, or if they just rely on the dogma that 'cheap means rubbish'?? I know that this is often the case, but we shall see.
I wasn't expecting much, but I put it on the 10D, and took it out for a test.
I admit to being astonished at just how good this little lens is! It's barely bigger than the EF18-55 kit lens, weighs about the same as a Mars bar, has a plastic lens mount, and a lens hood a little bigger than a coke bottle cap. The fact that it weighs so little, makes the plastic lens mount a non issue.
It feels very sturdy though, and is well finished. AF is practically noiseless, though it is woefully slow. This is relative however, it still achieves focus at both ends of the zoom in less than a second. Zoom action is smooth, and given that it is a 4 x zoom, there is no barrel creep at all.
It's advertised as a Macro capable lens, but there is no macro setting on the zoom ring.
I had it focussing as close as 1m, and it seemed to offer a mag of about 1:3.
It performed well too. I have to admit that at 200mm, it was a little soft, but I think that it is sharper at all focal lengths than a Canon EF 75-300 f4-5.6 II I used to own.
There is no vignetting at all, either on the 10D, or indeed on my 1D IIn, which is odd, as Tamron say it shouldn't be used on anything with sensor larger than 23 x 16 mm, or crop factor of 1.5/1.6. The sensor on the 1D MkIIn is 28.7 x 19.1 mm, crop factor 1.3.
It was pretty sharp too throughout the zoom ranges, and the results obviously got sharper as the aperture size decreased. Aperture stayed constant from 55mm - 130mm, and then gradually decreased, f4.5 @150mm,
f5@160mm, to f5.6@200mm. I reckon this is excellent, it in essence means that you have a 130mm f4 lens!
I was astonished though, how sharp this lens was at maximum aperture. Ok, I admit that it was a tiny wee bit soft in the corners at 55mm, but above 100mm, it sharpened up nicely. Even at 55mm however, corner sharpness was more than acceptable.
Colour balance, saturation, and contrast were all pretty good too!
These pics actually demonstrate the IQ and sharpness of this little belter of a lens. They were all shot at f4 @ISO200. They are all crops of 2mp images. No manipulation, straight from the camera, and all were hand held.
At 90mm:
At 100mm:
At 55mm:
Just for the record, my 70-200 f2.8L cost me £900. This cost me £55, ie, about 1/18th of the price of the 'L'. is the 'L' 18 times better?? I have to say that for most purposes it's not, but when you want that tack sharp, once only image, then I guess the 'L' is 18 times more likely to get it first time.
If this get's back from Iceland in one piece, I'd me more than happy to give it a permanent home in my bag.
He has previous for damaging my kit before, so I advertised in the 'wants' for a cheap telezoom. 'Sepulchre' came up trumps with a mint - looks like new,Tamron EF 55-200 Di II LD.
I have read a lot of disparaging reports of these cheap little lenses, so I have decided to redress the balance a little. In fact this lens left me wondering if the 'reviewers' actually test the lens at all, or if they just rely on the dogma that 'cheap means rubbish'?? I know that this is often the case, but we shall see.
I wasn't expecting much, but I put it on the 10D, and took it out for a test.
I admit to being astonished at just how good this little lens is! It's barely bigger than the EF18-55 kit lens, weighs about the same as a Mars bar, has a plastic lens mount, and a lens hood a little bigger than a coke bottle cap. The fact that it weighs so little, makes the plastic lens mount a non issue.
It feels very sturdy though, and is well finished. AF is practically noiseless, though it is woefully slow. This is relative however, it still achieves focus at both ends of the zoom in less than a second. Zoom action is smooth, and given that it is a 4 x zoom, there is no barrel creep at all.
It's advertised as a Macro capable lens, but there is no macro setting on the zoom ring.
I had it focussing as close as 1m, and it seemed to offer a mag of about 1:3.
It performed well too. I have to admit that at 200mm, it was a little soft, but I think that it is sharper at all focal lengths than a Canon EF 75-300 f4-5.6 II I used to own.
There is no vignetting at all, either on the 10D, or indeed on my 1D IIn, which is odd, as Tamron say it shouldn't be used on anything with sensor larger than 23 x 16 mm, or crop factor of 1.5/1.6. The sensor on the 1D MkIIn is 28.7 x 19.1 mm, crop factor 1.3.
It was pretty sharp too throughout the zoom ranges, and the results obviously got sharper as the aperture size decreased. Aperture stayed constant from 55mm - 130mm, and then gradually decreased, f4.5 @150mm,
f5@160mm, to f5.6@200mm. I reckon this is excellent, it in essence means that you have a 130mm f4 lens!
I was astonished though, how sharp this lens was at maximum aperture. Ok, I admit that it was a tiny wee bit soft in the corners at 55mm, but above 100mm, it sharpened up nicely. Even at 55mm however, corner sharpness was more than acceptable.
Colour balance, saturation, and contrast were all pretty good too!
These pics actually demonstrate the IQ and sharpness of this little belter of a lens. They were all shot at f4 @ISO200. They are all crops of 2mp images. No manipulation, straight from the camera, and all were hand held.
At 90mm:
At 100mm:
At 55mm:
Just for the record, my 70-200 f2.8L cost me £900. This cost me £55, ie, about 1/18th of the price of the 'L'. is the 'L' 18 times better?? I have to say that for most purposes it's not, but when you want that tack sharp, once only image, then I guess the 'L' is 18 times more likely to get it first time.
If this get's back from Iceland in one piece, I'd me more than happy to give it a permanent home in my bag.
Nice little review too, thanks for sharing 
