normanhall Loc: Leslie Missouri

i have a tamron 70-300 and i love mine and there service and turnaround time on repairs is great.

tyronet2000 Loc: Northumberland UK

I have a Tamron 10-24mm. I know there are better and more expensive lenses out there, but, as an absolute amateur I usually say "Never mind the Quality, feel the Width" unless of course the lens in question has been panned by everyone.

Jlb10025 Loc: New York

I have both lenses tamron for a k5 and canon for a 1d mkII. The canon is superior for the focus speed and bokeh, weight is about the same in feel. I have a number of tamron lenses which produce good pictures but the canon are always better but obviously cost more. Hope this helps answer you question a bit.

BigBear Loc: Northern CT

I have 1 Tamron lens and 6 Canon lenses. I can't remember when I last used the Tamron because the Canon quality is much better. And I never had to send a Canon in for repair which I've had since 2000.

superstructure5

I have read and enjoyed all of the feedback on my question..I have looked at both lenses online and read about them....obviously cost is one of the major differences. I am new to photography, but want to take it seriously...do I think I will go professional?? At this time I don't think so, but who knows?? Maybe I have a hidden talent?!?!

My thinking is ... Do I need a more "professional" lens for more money, or is the Tamron going to do everything that I want/need to do?? I also have been kicking around in my head....I'll buy the Tamron and be done with it, but then I think....what happens later on down the road when/if I get better at this hobby and wish I would have bought the Canon...Something I will have to decide myself and as stated earlier.....then "plunk my money down". :) Thanks again for all of the input....I think I will go to a camera store and put the two lenses to the test and see what I think with them in my hand...maybe that will help!!! :)

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

For Nikon the Tamy 70-200mm compares beter than the Nikon 70-200, but not as good as the 2.8 version. With that said you are talking around $600 for Tamy and Nikon standard vs $2,600 for the Nikon 2.8.

GrainyKev Loc: Droitwich Spa. UK

Technically you could argue that there can be only one absolute best in each lens group. Thus, if you buy anything else you are compromising to 'what is good enough for you'. This now becomes subjective as everyone has different standards or needs. Good enough is good enough, so what if there is better? Just my meanderings.

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

Canon f/4 tests out to be slightly sharper than the 2.8. It is significantly lighter. You can pick up a non IS model used for under $500. It depends on use really. Outdoors, I would prefer the F/4 hands down.
Indoors, as for weddings, the 2.8. There is a reason third party lenses are measured against Canon / Nikon.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

These are some of the sites I use for reviews.

Camera Reviews
kenrockwell.com
dpreview.com
snapsort.com

Lens Reviews
http://kenrockwell.com
http://photozone.de/
http://dpreview.com

BlackBlt3D Loc: Oklahoma

I shoot Sony A35 & A55. I have the 70-200 f2.8, 50 f1.4, 18-270 f3.8, and 17-50 f2.8 all in Tamron. The 70-200 is an very good lens. If I had an unlimited budget I would have probably went with the Sony lens. On second thought, if I had an unlimited budget, I would have went with Ziess.

lexstgo Loc: Houston, TX

Steve, on this one I will beg to differ. My friend and I both purchased a 70-200 mm lens. My friend purchased the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II lens and I purchased the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 lens. We both got together and decided to put both lenses to the test. We wanted to see if the Canon lens was worth the price tag especially that it cost 1300.00 more than the Tamron. Both of us used a Canon 7D body with our lens for the comparison.

The end results were the same. Image quality (for the type of photography that we do) were the same. The only thing that made a difference (but not really worth it) was auto focus speed and image stabilization. The Tamron lens doesn't have any image stabilization and the auto focus motor is slow.

When using these lens, we always tend to use a tripod (unless you go to a sporting event where tripod/monopods are not allowed, in this the Canon would be the better choice). Due to that, IS is a mute point and not worth the extra money. We both tend to do manual focus. So worrying about the speed of the auto focus servo motor is not that much important for us.

With this being said, if you don't intend to be a "bleeding edge" sports photographer, rent both lenses and compare them. If you intend to use the lens for sporting events, buy the Canon. Don't go just by the reviews alone. Much of the reviews are like judging at a photo contest... It's very subjective from reviewer to reviewer. Read various reviews and if they are all conclusive with the same review, then go with it. If not, rent the lens and test it yourself. You will be the ultimate reviewer for the type and style of photography you will be doing. It really comes down to this: it's your decision and not everybody's opinion.

Oh, I am not a professional photographer. I only do this as a hobby to get away from the hustle and bustle of my everyday job... So this is just my opinion.

Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 used as a Macro


Mall fountain shot with the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8

TJ28012 Loc: Belmont, NC

Ihave both the Tamron 28-300 and the 18-250 and are very satisfied with both. They are older non-IS/VR lenses and the max apature is f:3.5. Although I have lots of Nikkor primes, I keep the Tamrons on both my D50 and D90 as walk-arounds and for grab shots of wildlife. When I do some serious shooting, I often switch to the primes.

For those of us on a budget, I would certainly recommend the Tamron line. Keep in mind that Nikkor/Canon lenses will have a better resale/trade-in value than off brands.

Georgia Peddler Loc: Brunswick, GA

So then, according to you, photos taken with an unknown lens are significantly less sharp, and thus "retty much not worth taking" That is the way I read your post. Ask MT
about his "offbrand" lenses and how well they work or don't work. I still have my old Nikon 80-200/2.8 and also a Tamron. I can guarantee you that the sharpness is definitely there with both. Also, how many of us old photogs can remember when every year brought the newest and most desirable "must have" in order to remain in businessw. Now it seems like this revelation occurs almost every 3 days?? One would have to keep a camera body on hand just to have one to work with while the others were en-route of being traded and shipped back and forth in order to have the critical "NEWEST THING"

Al Beatty Loc: Boise, Idaho

Hi superstructure5,

I shoot Nikon rather than Canon and own 3 Tamron lenses and about a dozen Nikon. None of my Tamron lenses are zoom; they are all primes. The Tamrons shoot good enough pictures for the type of work I do but I notice they are noisier when focusing than the Nikon lenses (Nikon is almost totally silent while the Tamron are not). I also have one Sigma lens and it's performance is very similar to the Tamron, a little noisier when focusing.

Regarding which brand to purchase: You need to decide how bad you need a particular lens, what you can afford and what you plan to use the pictures for. I use mine to illustrate magazine articles so the pix published are never more than 11" x 14" (give or take) and most of them are never bigger than 4" x 6" (give or take). Good luck with your lens search and let us know what you decide (and why). Take care & ...

Tight Lines - Al Beatty
BT's Fly Fishing & Photography
www.btsflyfishing.com

Bill Emmett Loc: Bow, New Hampshire

All this lens talk reminds me of a friend who wanted to buy a new stereo for his car. He was avid sterio nut, and wanted the best for his car, .002 distortion, high frequency range, etc. He went on and on about how great the radio was. He drove a rattle trap TR-3 convertible. The Tamron lens will probably be just fine for this person. If we are talking kit lens vs the best Canon has to offer, take the Tamron. I had very poor quality photos from my kit lenses on my 50d, so I sold them, and bought a new 18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 the difference between the kits from Canon and the Tamron was astounding. I also got some pretty good discounts, and a gift card.