canon EF 70-200mm F/2.8L IS II usm
May 7, 2015 13:48:32 #
May 7, 2015 13:51:09 #
amfoto1 wrote:
Incorrect... The 70-200/2.8 "Mark I" u ... (show quote)
Wasn't picking nits. Your statement, as originally posted, made it seem that you were unaware that the 100-400 L II had a fluorite element.
You are correct about the original 70-200 2.8 L vs the Mk I. My mistake. But since the original is still a very good lens, and since it is the only L version, aside from the Mk II, available new, I doubt the OP got too confused. For that matter, a used or refurbed Mk I would also seem to be a good option for him to consider.
May 7, 2015 13:52:19 #
May 7, 2015 13:52:48 #
May 7, 2015 15:12:58 #
oleairman wrote:
question new and I was wanting to buy this lens but $$$ man is there one you may recommend that is same speed and durable as this..???
Very easy answer, the Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 rates equal to the Nikon & Canon Lenses. And goes for $1050.00.
Craig
May 7, 2015 15:43:15 #
cheineck wrote:
Hate to say it, but my Tamron 70-200 2.8, etc. comes within 2% of the the Canon's quality at a heck of a lot cheaper price.
Cheineck(and now Craig), I HATE TO SAY IT, but your Tamron is NOT as good, sharpness-wise or as the Canon 70-200 f4 IS, the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS mkl and probably even the 70-200 f4 non-IS lenses, let alone the new Mkll lens. And SEVERAL of those lenses are less money than the Tamron!
I'd like to see WHERE you came up with that 2% figure?!???! Did you just throw it out there??? :lol:
SS
May 7, 2015 16:04:15 #
I wondered about that too? The Tamron lenses I've owned are usually slower and nowhere near the clarity of my Canon lenses.
Chris
Chris
SharpShooter wrote:
Cheineck(and now Craig), I HATE TO SAY IT, but your Tamron is NOT as good, sharpness-wise or as the Canon 70-200 f4 IS, the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS mkl and probably even the 70-200 f4 non-IS lenses, let alone the new Mkll lens. And SEVERAL of those lenses are less money than the Tamron!
I'd like to see WHERE you came up with that 2% figure?!???! Did you just throw it out there??? :lol:
SS
I'd like to see WHERE you came up with that 2% figure?!???! Did you just throw it out there??? :lol:
SS
May 7, 2015 16:35:09 #
Amfoto1 also fails to mention the 80-200 2.8 Canon - as well as the f4 non IS having fluorite and having as good if not better IQ as ANY of the 70-200's - as well as taking TC's as well !
May 7, 2015 16:43:18 #
SharpShooter wrote:
Cheineck(and now Craig), I HATE TO SAY IT, but your Tamron is NOT as good, sharpness-wise or as the Canon 70-200 f4 IS, the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS mkl and probably even the 70-200 f4 non-IS lenses, let alone the new Mkll lens. And SEVERAL of those lenses are less money than the Tamron!
I'd like to see WHERE you came up with that 2% figure?!???! Did you just throw it out there??? :lol:
SS
I'd like to see WHERE you came up with that 2% figure?!???! Did you just throw it out there??? :lol:
SS
WOW!!! Do a little research before going off the deep end. I was being kind when I said the Canon lenses where just as good.
They actually are not even close to the quality of the Tamron 70-200 2.8.
Now read the Ratings and take back your nonsense. SS you are usually right on with your comments what happened???
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/EF70-200mm-f-2.8L-IS-USM-versus-Tamron-SP-70-200mm-F28-Di-VC-USD-Canon___222_0_1027_0
Craig
May 7, 2015 16:47:34 #
imagemeister wrote:
Amfoto1 also fails to mention the 80-200 2.8 Canon - as well as the f4 non IS having fluorite and having as good if not better IQ as ANY of the 70-200's - as well as taking TC's as well !
Amfoto is slipping!!
Meister, tell me which punishment fits that heinous crime!!!
I can drive over there(I do know the way to San Jose!), and either kick him in the shin, or, I can wrestle him onto a cross, nail him onto it and then light him on fire!!!!
Just want to be sure I do the right thing! :lol: :lol:
SS
May 7, 2015 17:39:42 #
SharpShooter wrote:
Amfoto is slipping!!
Meister, tell me which punishment fits that heinous crime!!!
I can drive over there(I do know the way to San Jose!), and either kick him in the shin, or, I can wrestle him onto a cross, nail him onto it and then light him on fire!!!!
Just want to be sure I do the right thing! :lol: :lol:
SS
Meister, tell me which punishment fits that heinous crime!!!
I can drive over there(I do know the way to San Jose!), and either kick him in the shin, or, I can wrestle him onto a cross, nail him onto it and then light him on fire!!!!
Just want to be sure I do the right thing! :lol: :lol:
SS
:thumbup:
Shot below with Canon 80-200 2.8 L W/2X Tamron SP ......
May 7, 2015 19:08:48 #
Mightymouse
Loc: Long Island NY
There is no substitution! I have it on my 60d still trying to tame it! It exceeds my ability
May 7, 2015 19:27:39 #
oleairman wrote:
question new and I was wanting to buy this lens but $$$ man is there one you may recommend that is same speed and durable as this..???
make the sacrifice if it is with possiblilies. I would buy used if I could see it in person or have return priviledges at a good store like Adorama or B&H. This lense will keep it's value, so it is not money down the drain. I will say that you need to microfocus at several focal lengths, to be sure it is spot on. You can see how to do that at birdsasart.com My wife shot a kingfisher with this lens at 2.8 after sundown in a dark mangrove swamp with a 5D3 at 25,000 ISO. It is amazing, people rave over it, while there is some noise it is not an issue
I am on the road and don't have the photo to up load, but if you will send me a message or email I can send the photo and other shot with this lens if you would like. You will love this lens!
May 7, 2015 20:18:06 #
CraigFair wrote:
WOW!!! Do a little research before going off the deep end. I was being kind when I said the Canon lenses where just as good.
They actually are not even close to the quality of the Tamron 70-200 2.8.
Now read the Ratings and take back your nonsense. SS you are usually right on with your comments what happened???
They actually are not even close to the quality of the Tamron 70-200 2.8.
Now read the Ratings and take back your nonsense. SS you are usually right on with your comments what happened???
:lol: Craig, you should be ashamed of yourself. That camera is almost 10 years old and the lens 15!!
But, I see you are strictly a DXO'er!!
I'd like to see the MTF's for both lenses which DXO will not use. Did dxo measure in the mid-lens and the corners? Even that new Tamron falls apart in the corners. I've never read a real world test where a Tamron was better than a Canon zoom.
Either way we'll never see an apples to apples test between the two because of the age differences.
If I were offered either a Tamron or a mkll at no cost, I can tell you which one I'd grab!
If I were offered a Tamron of a new-old stock Canon mkl I'd still take the Canon. I place a lot of importance on the long end and the focus reliability.
Obviously, you'd take the Tammy over either Canon!! :lol:
SS
Jun 22, 2015 11:43:02 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.