Tamron AF70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro

[Jeffery]

Tamron AF70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro

When posting photos, please give any and all information in regards to the photo that you can. This extra information will give more information about how the photo was taken and with what camera body.

Example:

Canon 20d : @16mm : 1/200th : f3.5 : 1600 ISO : AV Mode : -1/3 Exp Comp

[Jeffery]

Click for larger images

Sony A700 : @200mm : 1/1600th : f5.6 : 400 ISO : Aperture Priority Mode


Sony A700 : @200mm : 1/1250th : f5.6 : 400 ISO : Aperture Priority Mode


Sony A700 : @200mm : 1/1000th : f5.6 : 400 ISO : Aperture Priority Mode

[psmantaring]

I just got this lens and am still getting used to it... quite a change from the Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6, here's a few I took from my first outing with it this past weekend...

Nikon D90 : @200mm : 1/4000th : Auto ISO (ISO200) : AP Mode : -2/3EV



Nikon D90 : @135mm : 1/80th : Auto ISO (ISO200) : SP Mode : -2/3EV

[HaloZ]

nice panning work!

[MRCPix]

so I rented this lens and I just got it and these are the first pics I took with it.
1. F2.8 at 200mm
2.f3.2 at 200mm
3. f4 at 200mm
shoot with D300 set on jpg large

[eebronc]

Sony a200:@70mm:1/1000:iso 400:shutter priority

[dbond911]

I'm looking at this lens vs. the Nikon version. Besides price, anyone have any other comments between the two lens?

[MRCPix]

personal opinion is if you are using for anything other than sports it is great, but I had bad luck with it in sports. There are others on this forum that have had good success with it shooting sports.
I choose to use the nikon 80-200 f/2.8

[dbond911]

Originally Posted by MRCPix

personal opinion is if you are using for anything other than sports it is great, but I had bad luck with it in sports. There are others on this forum that have had good success with it shooting sports.
I choose to use the nikon 80-200 f/2.8

im leaning toward the Nikon myself. I've got other equipment to buy though. going out tomorrow to test the Tamron & Nikon in the stores to see what I think. I prefer only to buy Nikon, but I do enjoy my Tamron 200-400mm, its been a great workhouse at the racetrack.

[corralup]

Originally Posted by dbond911

im leaning toward the Nikon myself. I've got other equipment to buy though. going out tomorrow to test the Tamron & Nikon in the stores to see what I think. I prefer only to buy Nikon, but I do enjoy my Tamron 200-400mm, its been a great workhouse at the racetrack.

I too have the 200-400mm Tamron and let me tell you after using the Tamron for over a year there is a huge difference! I went and bought the 70-200 2.8 Nikon 3 months ago and that is all I use now. I get more keeper shots with Nikon and the clarity of the picture is out of this world. The Tamron is much softer IMO.
I use a 2x teleconverter for more reach with it for birding.
Just had to chime in on that one. Thanks for reading my thoughts.

Sandy

[dbond911]

Originally Posted by corralup

I too have the 200-400mm Tamron and let me tell you after using the Tamron for over a year there is a huge difference! I went and bought the 70-200 2.8 Nikon 3 months ago and that is all I use now. I get more keeper shots with Nikon and the clarity of the picture is out of this world. The Tamron is much softer IMO.
I use a 2x teleconverter for more reach with it for birding.
Just had to chime in on that one. Thanks for reading my thoughts.

Sandy

Thanks for the info! What you said, is what I needed to know.

[chemisti]

Thoughts on AF speed (and as important - accuracy).

I think that the lens' optics are stellar. However, the AF is IMHO merely functional.

Yes, you can shoot sports/action with it and produce good images. You can also produce very good images with a manual focus lens, if you're willing to do the extra work necessary and are willing to put up with missed opportunities. This discussion (expectation) is influenced by what is currently attainable with modern equipment.

My observation with this lens was that the AF speed alone was not as fast as something like my 80-200 f2.8 AF-s. OK, fine - willing to accept that for the price of the lens! Had that been the only "niggle" I would've lived with it. The frustrating thing to me was when I would attempt to focus on a slow moving or static subject and the lens would sometimes just "miss". It was not just it's speed - it was its accuracy and hesitation that was frustrating.

I held on to mine for some months before finally selling it after I bought my 80-200 f2.8 AF-s because I really like some of the other properties of the lens - love the bokeh, minimum focus distance, weight, color rendition, etc. I really like the images here that were shot under "relaxed" conditions.

But if you shoot sports, IMHO, you may desire to move another direction.

Good luck.