Opinion on 70-200 lenses - Tamron vs. Canon
Nov 27, 2017 00:36:35 #
I've been shooting football for a few years now renting a Canon 70-200 and am now considering buying, however, it was suggested I look into Tamron. Has anyone had any experience with Tamron lenses?
Nov 27, 2017 00:55:21 #
Nov 27, 2017 02:01:24 #
mas24
Loc: Southern CA
Deb Gieser wrote:
I've been shooting football for a few years now renting a Canon 70-200 and am now considering buying, however, it was suggested I look into Tamron. Has anyone had any experience with Tamron lenses?
As mentioned already, the Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 has very good reviews from articles and this forum. If you rented the Canon L lens, you must know how good that lens is already. NFL photographers use that Canon lens on the 1DX Mark 2. The Tamron G2 is worth buying.
Nov 27, 2017 08:43:53 #
I tried a Canon 70-200 and 24-70 f 2.8 side by side with comparable Tamron's and my perception was that the Canons were little quicker to focus especially with the longer lenses. The salesman also felt this was the case. This might be a consideration when shooting sports.
Bill
Bill
Nov 27, 2017 08:53:26 #
Deb Gieser wrote:
I've been shooting football for a few years now renting a Canon 70-200 and am now considering buying, however, it was suggested I look into Tamron. Has anyone had any experience with Tamron lenses?
I have used the latest Canon as well as both generations of the Tamron on my 5D MK IV body and found the Tamron G2 to be the fastest focusing, and the quietest of the three. It also costs $800 less and has a 6 year warranty compared to Canons 1 year warranty. It was a "no brainer" to buy the Tamron!
Nov 28, 2017 06:08:41 #
Deb Gieser wrote:
I've been shooting football for a few years now renting a Canon 70-200 and am now considering buying, however, it was suggested I look into Tamron. Has anyone had any experience with Tamron lenses?
Here are some comparisons of 70-200mm lenses, but I'm not sure they will have the latest lenses.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAAeoB1F7nI
http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/roundup/lens-roundup/best-70-200mm-tele-zoom-lenses-64789
https://petapixel.com/2015/03/28/just-the-lenses-the-great-200mm-shoot-out/
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=that+nikon+guy+70-200mm
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=687&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=946&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
Nov 28, 2017 08:04:51 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
Deb Gieser wrote:
I've been shooting football for a few years now renting a Canon 70-200 and am now considering buying, however, it was suggested I look into Tamron. Has anyone had any experience with Tamron lenses?
I am not a Canon guy but their 70-200 is worthy of serious consideration.
Nov 28, 2017 08:09:00 #
I shoot my son’s team rugby for their website, horse shows, wrestling and a variety of other sports with Tamron lenses (28-300, 18-400, 150-600) and have always had quite decent results. Made a lot of $ for my carriage club when I donated my time to their local show and people bought many photos.
Nov 28, 2017 08:26:14 #
The best thing to do is to get both lenses along with the comparable Sigmas and test them side-by-side. This is is very important so as to eliminate variables that might alter your conclusion. I use a lens target and tripod. Then I walk around for a real world comparison.
Nov 28, 2017 08:31:51 #
I have the Canon f/2.8 IS II and have no issues with it. Very nice lens and very versatile. I shoot drag racing and sports with it as well as portraits. I am not into 3rd party lenses, but that is just me. I also have the 2.0x TC III that I use with it. Not inexpensive but I figure to have it and use it a long time.
Best,
Todd Ferguson
Best,
Todd Ferguson
Nov 28, 2017 08:37:07 #
I like all the opinions here about lenses and rarely any data to back them up. A lot of heat and no light. We should have a rule that if you opine on a lens, present the data to justify your position. I am not holding my breath about this.
Nov 28, 2017 08:59:01 #
My only experience with Tamron and the lens you mentioned are the images I have seen from it. Those images are awesome.
I guess it all depends on how much do you want to spend.
I guess it all depends on how much do you want to spend.
Nov 28, 2017 09:05:07 #
abc1234: would you rather we all just ignore the OP? What kind of data do you expect us to include, considering the wide range of interests and talent in here?
Nov 28, 2017 09:11:24 #
Get the Canon. AF faster, best glass. I went cheap, and gradually realized I shouldn't have. Never buyers regret when you invest in the best.
Nov 28, 2017 09:14:01 #
fotobyferg wrote:
abc1234: would you rather we all just ignore the OP? What kind of data do you expect us to include, considering the wide range of interests and talent in here?
Great question. The short answer is find out what works best for you. I think the lens (like so much else in this world) is part objective, part subjective. Figure out how good the lens is in comparison with comparables. Then ask yourself if the differences really matter to you. As for the subjective part of the exercise, shoot what you normally do with both lenses and then decide which one you prefer based upon results, ease of use, weight or any other criteria you wish. Also, decide if the difference in cost is worth it. Do read what others say but you should decide based upon your own experience. If this is all too hard to do, then post, read and hope you are happy with your choice.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.