RCE Foto

(i) On JuzaPhoto, please disable adblockers (let's see why!)






Login LogoutJoin JuzaPhoto!
JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).

By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.


OK, I confirm


You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here

Accept CookiesCustomizeRefuse Cookies

Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD : Specifications and Opinions




Reviews

The opinions of JuzaPhoto members who use this lens.. (Click here to come back to the main page of the Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD)




What do you think about this lens?


Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!

There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 241000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.





Google Translate  The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.


avatarjunior
sent on March 23, 2018

Pros: Price, sharpness, stabilizer

Cons: it is not tropicalized

Opinion: A 200mm TA has a good sharpness that from f4 to F8 becomes excellent. At other focal lengths things improve slightly from TA to F11. Only at f32 seemed to me too unclear, but I have not invested much time in studying the diaphragm yield so closed. The quality step between f2.8 and f4 is good, but in absolute terms at f2.8 the images that it produces are already very good. The mtf tests confirm what I found on the field. The homologue Canon ef 70-200 f2.8 is IIL has an extra point to f11 for the rest is hard to distinguish them. The stabilizer allows you to shoot freehand at 200mm even at 1/15 of a second, at least this applies to me. In practice on the used market the only alternative canon attack comparable to this Tamron is the 70-200 f2.8 L smooth as the is II costs at least twice. The weight is in line with its category, which means that the materials used are similar. The color Black makes it less noisy than the biancone and, although not decisive, it is an aspect that I appreciate. In sintesi: excellent compromise thanks to a great price and a truly professional quality.

avatarjunior
sent on February 22, 2018

Pros: All: color rendering, sharpness, stabilization, af

Cons: even if not enough, the lens is unusable with the hood mounted in reverse

Opinion: excellent lens, used on 6d and 6d mkii, excellent detail already at TA, effective stabilization (knowing well lens and body, and having the hand accustomed, I can shoot at 1 / 30-50 to 200 mm), suffers a bit of focus breathing, but with the right precautions I use it without problems for photos and videos. Optics with a not indifferent weight, as it is right for a lens of its caliber. Color rendering perfect even compared to the older canon brothers. Last autofocus not so slow as we tend to believe, I find it very reactive (even the camera body does a lot) in a bit slower than the older canon brothers but nothing more. Personally I used it for indoor dance shows, with critical lighting conditions, but I was never disappointed. Purchased after months of comparisons, tests and videos on youtube, who is evaluating this perspective I can only say buy it with your eyes closed! If I have to give an indication of maximum I classify them in this way: canon is 1st ver, tamron vc 1st ver, canon smooth evenlymerit or slightly lower than the g2 version of the tamron, canon is 2 ° ver.rnGood Light

avatarsenior
sent on September 03, 2017

Pros: Sharpness, stabilizer, value for money

Cons: At the moment no one

Opinion: I've been around for almost two years, I was looking for a 70-200 to replace my Bianchino (sold at a time of overturning the kit). At the same price in the used I could have a stabilized lens but f2.8, honestly I did not think too much. I tried it well, on 5D2 and 70D before, and on 5D3 and 6D then, always with great satisfaction. I like the colors that it returns, the sharpness already at TA and the stabilizer (which you have to get used to with the image in the viewfinder). Rn The MAF does not seem so slow as some say, although I can not compare it to Biancone (which also costs double ...) I use it also multiplied, and sharpness does not severely affect it.

avatarjunior
sent on April 09, 2017

Pros: Sharpness, stabilizer, overall yield

Cons: hood inconvenient when screwed on the contrary

Opinion: Bought from shortly after trying various sigma similar, and several such nikon 80 200 2.8 to pump and True Union, and tamron same model but not stabilized; Well, nssuno manning the comparison, nemeno remotely disarming clarity, already at TA, lifelike colors, stabilizer that allowed me to also take 1/20 in lengths 180 and 200, against eccellente.rnDi really honestly I noticed a little .. .si can say the weight, but who buys it knows which lens is, and that therefore could not be diversamente.rnHo found also excellent for the tripod ring, excellent construction, all metal of course, like the rest of the 'goal stesso.rnLa rendering is excellent at all focal lengths and maximum aperture of F4 ... become perfect, it decreases the focal maximum, but only slightly, and even there, to 2.8 is fine, at F6.3 perfetto.rnUn'ottica the great price when you consider that it costs half of a Nikon, and that made it really, really, eccezionale.voto 10, recommended assolutamente.rnUltima thing, I SentTo around to say that, compared with sigma, for example, è more resolving, but is guilty of af .... I honestly have noticed an AF always very fast, and extremely quiet (vr the other hand a little noise does), and a disarming clarity.

avatarjunior
sent on February 11, 2017

Pros: Quality image stabilizer, sharpness and colors.

Cons: focus breathing

Opinion: Excellent sharpness at all focal also 2.8, stabilizer that allows shots to 1/10 to 200 mm, beautiful, saturated colors that do not require major interventions in post produzione.rnAnche the boheh is not bad to be a zoom and l ' autofocus has never given me problems combined D750.rnL'unico flaw in my opinion is the sharp focus breathing is suffering, like all the 70 200, which is bothersome in the videos and in close up. rnAd every way is certainly not an insurmountable defect, especially given the prezzo.rn

avatarjunior
sent on December 21, 2016

Pros: Color, Contrast, Autofocus quick and quiet location, is extraordinary and silent Stabilization, Polyphoto 10 year warranty. virtually everything

Cons: Lack of dedicated housing, frankly nothing else.

Opinion: I hesitated a lot before buying this lens, but after trying the latest generation of Nikkor lens, the 70-200 2.8 vrii, it had me a little 'disappointed with the color rendering too cold (like Nikon tradition) and the very high cost that would not admit any doubts. However, after the first round of the Tamron, my heart was relieved of many worries. I 'a goal which I think is worth all that it costs and that (beyond the price difference) even prefer it to Nikon for color saturation and for sharper contrast. Photos taken with this lens does not require a post boost production or to increase sharpness, stunning even at f2.8 (at least in my copy). In addition the stabilizer is king. I swear I took 1/5 of a second aiming for a static object, freehand, and the picture was perfect. Autofocus is fast, even in low light situations (by mounting the lens on Nikon d700) therefore did not give me problems itlle sports photos (Serie B football and basketball League A) allowing me to freeze baskets and shots on goal with a pleasant color feedback. Until now he has given me big satisfactions also for concerts and photojournalistic services. Being used to a lot (even postprodurre to rectify the weaknesses of a now dated D700) feeling that gave me this lens is very relieved to have me work and for having virtually rejuvenate the body machine. Among the small (and in my opinion trascurabilissime negative notes) the fact of not being able to rotate the zoom ring with the lens hood in the rest position and the lack of a dedicated housing. I found also that the construction and the materials used are of poor quality, although the optics is probably inferior to the quality of the Nikon in the overall project. Finally, the vignetting and distortion produced by the lens are not at all excessive and, deliberately, not speaking almost never with the appropriate corrections in order to maintain the sense of "environment" that this light canreturn, especially in the portraits. Excluding this, I would recommend this lens even to the purists of the brand Nikon (no ifs, ands or buts). To them I say that perhaps can not strut with colleagues, but still bring home a result uncompromising, saving a lot 'of euro to be invested in other optical

avatarjunior
sent on November 18, 2016

Pros: Crisp, quality construction

Cons: Nobody

Opinion: Excellent materials. Excellent sharpness on the whole range and all diaframmirnVelocità of 'truly impressive AF !!! Also stressed out with sudden changes of focal distance to the subject and the answer is always ready and precisarnStabilizzatore which is a show !!! given the weight and optical zoom range I think it is a great help for this lens !!! rnRapporto unsurpassed quality price especially in my case;) rn

avatarjunior
sent on October 17, 2016

Pros: crisp already TA at all focal very good stabilization, build quality and price

Cons: I think no one

Opinion: Great alternative to the Nikon VRII, clear and precise already at TA. The stabilization do not hear but not see (very quiet unlike his brother 70-300 USD) optical I love return and for the focus that returns. On FF offers a very pleasant blur that transforms simple portraits into something special. I recommend it to all those who are still in search of a perspective as you have in the world SLR

avatarsenior
sent on September 18, 2016

Pros: Crisp clear already 'at f2.8 stabilizzazzione exceptional

Cons: nobody

Opinion: Good buy super crisp to f2.8 at 200mm you can also shoot at 1/50 outstanding stabilization rnNon .... I tried the bianchini but I did very distant and crop photos to 60% and the photos are sharp super open 100 % ... rnHo chose this because it has better stability compared to sigma ... rnRapporto quality 'unbeatable price paid in 1160 by rce with 10 years guarantee ... rnDevo say worth every cent spent excellent also the building by removing the 'ring to secure it to the tripod still gains weight by taking a free hand to achieve very good results ...

avatarjunior
sent on May 31, 2016

Pros: sharpness, stabilizer, construction quality, price

Cons: if we want to be picky the focus speed

Opinion: After a few years I decided to return on a canvas and I must say this tamron compared to the big brother canon has nothing to invidiare.rnL'unica flaw is its slowness in focus with the function to serve but to no static photos problema.rnLo stabilizer instead is something exceptional, besides the fact that you do not hear anything at all (like the canon f2 is 35), I can take sharp freehand photo with 1/30 times .... precise immediately that although being a lover of photography are not known for my steady hand ... rnAltra satisfaction I got it looking at the test results of dxo where my canon 6d with Tamron overall scores one point in more 'than the canon second series! rn

avatarjunior
sent on May 31, 2016

Pros: Sharpness, even at full aperture, very effective stabilization, price

Cons: Maybe the weight, but it is a natural consequence of its features. How evil the (my) arms after two hours the Scarrozzo.

Opinion: Excellent lens, well-built, large yield, nice blurred and razor sharp. The autofocus is not the first in the speed class, but you can not 'have it all. Value, like almost all Tamron lenses in recent years, can not be beat. Definitely, it does not go unnoticed, given the size. The less pleasant is the weight, but if you want a lens like this, there can be no alternative.

user31483
avatarjunior
sent on March 14, 2016

Pros: sharpness already af 2.8, excellent color, stability, price.

Cons: af inaccurate in i-servant, vignetting 200

Opinion: for what it costs I would say that the advantages are more than satisfactory now the quality of tamron goals is to standar high. The overall quality is very good on the whole, of course, if you take compared the canon two series there is no history but at what price ... tried on many occasions sports, bird life, portraiture, certainly does not regret the more famous. I use it with the mark 3 but also on the 7d thanks to the crop factor brings out the sharp file. Soddisfattiasimo my Tammy

avatarjunior
sent on January 21, 2016

Pros: TA crisp and clear, beautiful colors, excellent stabilization.

Cons: Weight (but not really seen against a type of lens)

Opinion: Aside from the weight after a day at the neck feels a lot ... you know for a lens so solid and robust quality that is the price to pay !! RNA than that I do not find fault ... it's amazing quality too TA, I tried for a whole day Biancone Canon (which of course has no equal), but given the price difference (the Tamron I bought at 750 with another 4-year warranty) has nothing to envy, and the amateur semi-pro I think is the perfect choice.

avatarjunior
sent on January 20, 2016

Pros: crystal clear already in TA and all focal, beautiful color rendering and fuzzy, well-made, fast AF

Cons: does not accept teleconverters on nikon (insert between defects weight is the footprint does not make sense for the type of lens in question)

Opinion: I no longer have to set this lens because I did not feel comfortable with this type of lens for the weight and bulk, and I preferred a fixed (Nikon 180mm f2.8). If you are aware of the footprint and weight typical of this type of goals then absolutely I recommend the purchase of the competition. Compared to the Nikon that I got to compare with this I feel better for the Tamron and sharpness equivalent to stabilize colors and blurred, only slightly lower for autofocus (tested on D750). The only flaw is not indifferent to the Nikon is the inability to mount multipliers (only on Nikon bodies)

avatarjunior
sent on January 11, 2016

Pros: PRICE Sharpness

Cons: FOR NOW I HAVE NOT FOUND

Opinion: I think the 70-200mm f / 2.8 VC USD FOR CANON is a great objective value for the price, I took great pictures, I really changed my mind! I recommend it to those who do not want to spend a fortune while having a good quality! indicated x photo sports, naturalistic but sometimes x marriages and close-ups. often used indoors has a good brightness.

avatarjunior
sent on December 11, 2015

Pros: Value for money

Cons: Tropicalization

Opinion: Like many fans of photography in my brain cells lurked for some time the iconic image of the noble Canon 70200. A doubt tormented me: f 4 is? Or do the folly of buying directly f 2.8 is ii? I possessed also the Tamron 70 300 4 5.6 and despite having paid 300 euro gave me great satisfaction. Lately I have dedicated myself to take portraits, also ambientati. In my head it was so often the head 135 l f2, definitely one of the best lenses ever for portraitists. But then, by setting the focus of my zoom to 135mm, I mounted on 6d I was aware of the limits that this lens would give me. So off to read reviews. I was convinced that it would be better for me 100 f2 or maybe even save a bit 'and then take 85 F1.8. But the red line Canon attracted me too. And so to read reviews and see photos. In the end I decided: I sell my madness and the 16 35 f4 is used very little, sell the Tamron 70,300 and I take the best of the best: Canon is 2.8 ii. Yesterday I left for my store. Featured also the ottimthe used 2.8 with and without stabilizer, but only the first series. I express my will and the owner said to me: you've tried the Tamron 70,200 2.8 vc? You take it so you can mount it and test it. He adds: clearly the Canon and 'best level constructive and probably slightly better performance, but it also costs 900 euro more. If you take the first series Canon strongly urge you to take this. The first had some problems with af. Now all sorted. So you have a crystal-clear lens, practice is very versatile. It weighs but not excessively. The mountains and the more they take away. The purge the day you'll feel younger brother 24 70. Many business customers are replacing their series with these two gems from the 'excellent value for money. Bartering and 'lasted a few minutes and left holding the new tool. Actually were days that comparavo various pictures here of Juza and I had already realized that it is true that many shots with the Canon arebeautiful not 'only due to the quality of the machine and of the lens, but it is for a whole series of reasons, first among many the handle of the photographer. For example taking into consideration the portraits and 'clear that if taking and' an experienced photographer with a model super cool, in a fantasy setting, with the right lighting and so the result is' beautiful. But wonderful results the photographer gets even using the 85 mm f 1.8 which costs 6 times less. In order to make a fair comparison we should then have to repeat the exact same guy shot with two lenses and check on a 27 "screen at a 100% crop. And I'm sure the difference would be negligible anyway. So, given that I do not live in photography, which I must not take and sell photos to an international factory, which probably will use the lens to capture more the recitation of Christmas my children rather than Naomi Cambpell, and that if one day I were to do the limits will be more my that those equipment, I acceptedgladly advice the shopkeeper. Back home I immediately put to the test the new lens with taking the bad artificial lighting. Results are definitely evident. The pictures come out clear already at 2.8 and have a blurred very nice and pleasant. The stabilizer does its duty, with the only light bulbs at home 1/30 the image is perfect. Certainly if my intentions were those to take pictures of the rally, motocross, sandstorms or challenging situations and probably a tropicalization a more massive construction may be helpful. But at the time I have left in my pocket 900 Euros profits to buy more, pay some beautiful models or maybe just take a trip to take with the new lens!

avatarjunior
sent on December 05, 2015

Pros: Price, sharpness, construction

Cons: Slight delay stabilizer, AF "schizophrenic", focus breathing

Opinion: Some aspects are characteristics of the lens and I would not judge strengths and weaknesses (bright obviously being a 2.8, since they are also heavy 1470g etc.), while others are less obvious and it is worth making a list: rnrnpregirn- "sharpness "The difference with my other Tamron (SP 24-70 f2.8 Di VC) we see now, especially in the TA, who shot 90% of the photos, it is much more nitido.rn- good quality costruttivarn- prezzornrndifettirn- focus breathing quite marked (to remove focal length) rn- slight delay stabilizer rn- rare cases of madness in the AF-servo (total blur no apparent reason even in good light) rnrnda note that the rings is reversed compared canon for location for both direction of rotation, which in practice prevents you to zoom with hood in position of riposornrncomunque are very satisfied for the use that I'm doing (indoor sports)

avatarjunior
sent on October 21, 2015

Pros: Price, 2.8, quality equal to nikon

Cons: weight, not crystal clear 200 mm

Opinion: cho is a lens I took because in addition to the photos in the travel report, use for Series A basket.rnin hall with d7000 (I dare not imagine a FF) does very well, better than the Nikon 80-200 and to equal or almost the nikon 70-200 vr 1 and 2rnla most 'uncomfortable is definitely the weight, especially on the road, I think I'll keep' just for the photo palazzetto.rne will opt for travel 'for a fixed sigma 85 1.4 rnbisogna get used to how that fitted with stabilizer, long focal species in DX require adequate time, because being underexposed rnnon recoverable facilmente.rnè very good for portraits where the subject is "agree", but if it is used for a "hit and run" is a bit uncomfortable, the best 35 or 85 fixed

avatarjunior
sent on October 15, 2015

Pros: Price in relation to the results to take home, optical fantastic.

Cons: These figures do not find flaws, but finding hair in the egg would say the intrusiveness of the hood in a resting state.

Opinion: Not a professional, what impressed me most about this perspective is the sharpness at every focal and stabilization. I have not even got to try the Canon 70-200 f / 2.8 L II and comparisons would not be fair on my part. Surely you buy this model because it has the budget to buy the model canon. It has a remarkable price-performance ratio and it will certainly recommend the purchase, for those that are the results I can assure you that I could safely put aside all my curiosity to try the white mother of canon.

avatarjunior
sent on September 13, 2015

Pros: Price, quality ', focal range, af, construction, stabilizer

Cons: lack housing

Opinion: excellent lens, great quality 'image on the various different focal lengths and apertures. excellent sharpness already 'at RT. the stabilizer does a great job allowing handheld shooting, even under the safety time. focus very quickly allows you to make shots of moving subjects with ease. quality 'constructive very good. the value for '/ price and' huge, compared to the equivalent of Canon's house (the Tamron I paid the lens '!). for me, the lens hood and 'well-made plays and his job well. The only discordant note, the lack of housing. I expected a lot and read many reviews before buying it, but now that I have any doubts and 'vanished. and 'a lens of high quality' and would not hesitate to buy it again.

avatarjunior
sent on July 20, 2015

Pros: sharpness, construction, stabilizer, price, speed af

Cons: hood, without housing

Opinion: lens very valid. I was a little skeptical before buying it but the price gap with the canon is quite remarkable so I took it. He picked up immediately a good impression of build quality although the weight feels it is cmq 70-200 stabilized so ... rnnitidezza maf and speed are at the highest level has nothing to envy to the famous and expensive canikon. sin only for the lens hood poor and that in the rest position does not allow to use the ring nut of the focal lengths.

avatarsenior
sent on June 25, 2015

Pros: Sharpness, construction, stabilizer, price

Cons: Hood

Opinion: Until three years ago I too was wary of third-party lens manufacturers but after trying the Tamron 28-75 (which despite having many flaws still brought out beautiful photos) and 11-16 tokina me I had to think again. rnStabilizzatore good, sharpness already at f 2.8 (f 4 to clear outstanding) price ... worth every single penny of it (taken to € 1,100 with 5 year warranty). rnUnico neo the hood of lower quality than the lens and with many problems in placing it in position riposo.rnPosso only add that the quality of 70-200 I "forced", within 12 days, to change before the d7000 with the d750 and then 28-75 with the 24-70 Tamron VC.

user62707
avatarjunior
sent on June 24, 2015

Pros: Price, sharpness, stabilizer and f2.8

Cons: Read the post

Opinion: I bought this lens intrigued by the more affordable price than the canon (900 € less) rnOttima made at all focal lengths and all openings, I was (because I sold it to move to the 70-200 f4 canon. ...) Very satisfied photos which carried but ..... rnHo got to use an afternoon in the sun ... rnAd one point had become impossible to focuse because the heat given off by lente.rnQuesto made me reflect on the white of the canon and on the choice of materials used for the construction of lente.rnConclusione: apart from this lens incovegnente well riuscita.rn

avatarjunior
sent on June 22, 2015

Pros: Construction, optical performance, stabilizer, price.

Cons: Yield 200 to F: 2.8, sometimes uncertainty in the focus

Opinion: After reading several posts and forums I decided to take this light to replace my Nikon AFS 80/200 devoid of stabilizer immagine.La made, especially wide open, I was pleasantly surprised and my optic notice a slight drop af performance: only 2.8 to 200mm. The construction seems good with a good tripod socket, valid hood and stabilizer works very well. I notice that sometimes the focus is not clear in the medium / long distances at longer focal lengths. Update 12/01/2016, I sent the lens in Germany, through Polyphoto, returned calibrated and now no longer any problem.

avatarjunior
sent on May 15, 2015

Pros: Sharpness - Speed ??AF - Constructive Quality - Price / quality ratio - Tropicalisation

Cons: No case - Hood at rest - No limitatatore AF

Opinion: I took this lens after months and months of hesitation and a thousand doubts !!! I was pleasantly surprised by the speed of focusing and following well the subject once hooked, is so fast as to be useless to a limiter. The quality of the lenses and their performance are at the highest level, except for a drop in sharpness to the maximum focal length to 2.8 diaframmando to f4 things change drastically becoming a blade at all focal lengths. Weight, for me, is not a problem and I find it well-balanced with D600 + BG on tripod and monopod. Sore point on the hood that makes the lens a "cannon", not always easily seat and off its use both rings x the focus and the fire and forced to leave it in your backpack or mounted by the "right side". In conclusion, I am very satisfied of the lens to be used mainly in sports with some detour on portrait and fashion to be followed by integration of the review !!!

avatarjunior
sent on February 11, 2015

Pros: Price - Sharpness - Autofocus - Quality Constructive - Collars - Stabilizer - Bundle (Hood and Ring Tripod)

Cons: Weight - No Dedicated Case

Opinion: Purchased about 6 Months Ago, I made several outputs mounted on my 60D, the stabilizer is truly exceptional, despite not had much practice with panning shots I brought home very beautiful, loses a little something to 200mm in TA, but we see only in crop 100%, the rest has a truly exceptional optical performance, beautiful and even the blurry bokeh, focus USD is not on par with that of USM bianconi, but not the third to none! and especially in AI SERVO works really well, very welcome the bundle of the pack with its hood and tripod ring of high quality, in line with the build quality of the optics, also the rings are very fluid and did not play, if you have doubt there are many reviews around the web, on the whole is just behind the 70-200 f2.8 mk2 is usm .... so even if you are not professionals but still want a telephoto very good in my opinion is a great alternative toed the canon! Whereas much is a 30-40% lower despite the final yield of the photo is very similar

avatarjunior
sent on January 30, 2015

Pros: Value unprecedented

Cons: Difficult to find one if not a softness that is visible to 200mm f2.8 but very limited

Opinion: Goal with exceptional speed 'quiet and precise autofocus, very good construction, excellent stabilizer that keeps a significant reduction in the shake-specialmodo Nikon D800-810. The quality 'of the lenses and' definitely above average using diaphragms also very open from 70mm to 135 is a blade.

avatarjunior
sent on January 25, 2015

Pros: AF, sharpness (including TA), price, stabilizer, quality construction.

Cons: slight decrease in sharpness at 200mm (at least on my copy).

Opinion: A great goal. Sharp already TA at all focal lengths; Obviously closing the aperture slightly better. Ring Zoom and Focus, very fluid. The stabilizer does its dirty lavoro.rnLa build quality is very buona.rnLa focus is precise, perhaps a little flaw 'in AI Servo with the stabilizer turned on (just turn it off) .rnIl weight really do not feel it is a problem online with all the other 70 200 f / 2.8.rnPer the value for money, I think it imbattibile.rnOttimo lens for all; portraits, sports and landscape and avifauna.rnCredo can be very good for macro photography with added tubes prolunga.rn

avatarsupporter
sent on January 18, 2015

Pros: Manufacturing, colors and lenses definition, quality stabilization and auto focus, balance.

Cons: Not having tried it before! Seriously: the lack of a dedicated housing and, more severe, the tendency to let through the dust between the lenses: also the Canon 100-400 L IS-I does, but with a pump zoom, not internal. Hood effective but inconvenient if left on the body is not mounted, as does access to the settings (trifles ...)

Opinion: A large bell'obiettivo, really, who does not have significant difference in quality compared to the original Canon; I had the 70-200 2.8L and this I find equal optical quality, at a price very, very beneficial and stabilized. Solid, reliable, with a / f almost perfect pesantuccio but manageable - "falls to" immediately - and really valuable. Worth every euro spent and even more! I think if the current Tamron quality is such, and I confirm the many beautiful pictures made by others with 150-600, will buy the latter rather than the Sigma. rnVoto: 9

avatarsenior
sent on January 06, 2015

Pros: Exceptional sharpness even at 2.8 and all focali.Boken gradevolissimo.Costruzione solid and smaller burden, fluid controls and a nice paraluce.Viene provided with support for a tripod, but you shoot with ease even freehand times ridiculous thanks a stabilizer in exceptional

Cons: Honestly I have not found, when they are on their honeymoon with this goal!

Opinion: I had a canon unregulated f4 the series (The harrier) and I assure you that there is no comparison at all. Tamron is doing exceptional things. Are entusiasta.E 'a lens extremely versatile, with which you can photograph any style, from portraits to landscapes, through the still live.rnLa thing I like most is the ease with which you can shoot handheld for a stabilizer excellent. It also has a motor and a fast autofocus, which for now I have never betrayed.

avatarsenior
sent on December 17, 2014

Pros: Price / performance ratio and sharpness really top

Cons: Canon of the focus in AI servo on 5DIII not have the same response that the Nikon AF-C for the lens in low light loses efficiency. Also on 5DIII stabilization intervenes too late compared to the maf and sometimes abruptly here risking some shots.

Opinion: I had both the version that Nikon and Canon to this point I was 100% happy with the first and only 80% from the second, in fact, I find the sector focus of 5DIII a bit 'limited by the speed of the lens in the maf and also points out that in establishing an intervention too laggard compared to the focus as well as a little 'brusque. Afte tried different scenarios have always promoted the Nikon version while I found in obvious difficulty version Canon theater and shows with few lights and only artificial. Eventually I went to Canon L, surely for excessive fussiness but I found irritating certain limits mainly because the lens of her is outstanding and in normal conditions perhaps puts Canon and Nikon. Nikon straconsigliato on Canon to evaluate the use and the camera body on which to use it. For the price performance perhaps the best on the market.

avatarjunior
sent on December 16, 2014

Pros: The sharpness, excellent stabilization, price abbordabilissimo for optical professional.

Cons: Weight, without housing

Opinion: Beautiful to behold, slow that articulate inside doing remain "compact" 's goal, opening and blurred exceptional. A little heavy but 'normal price' to zoom f 4.5 not 2.8. With a multiplier then seo in place going up to 600! . The paralice and 'very nice and appraiscente but actually cumbersome. A case I would welcome given the level of the object

avatarsenior
sent on December 11, 2014

Pros: Extreme sharpness, perfect stabilization, MAF quick and precise, quality / price ratio

Cons: No One

Opinion: I use it for about a year and find it a lens of a unique versatility. From the picture naturalistic, the portrait (spectacular bokeh) at night landscape. I was definitely surprised by the great sharpness at all apertures. The stabilizer always behaves excellently eliminating the effect of blur. The autofocus is very accurate even in light conditions rather precarious. Certainly applies to the last euro that has cost. The best Tamron lens ever made.

avatarjunior
sent on November 18, 2014

Pros: Construction, sharpness, bokeh, stabilizer

Cons: None for now

Opinion: I replaced my Nikon 80-200 2.8 pump and I have to say that the Tamron I do not regret it! RNLA quality of materials is excellent, very well built. You see that is an optical pro. It 's very clear, 2.8 performs very well. The stabilizer works very well and is very quiet ... you can not take pictures at 1/40 200mm without blur. For now I'm torn between soddisfatto.rnEro this is the Nikon 70-200 f4, but in the end I decided on the Tamron .... and I know excited ... rnAdoro its yield to 2.8 :)

avatarsenior
sent on August 27, 2014

Pros: Tutto.sfocato, stabilizer, focus kidnapped and silenziosa.colori,

Cons: Niente.non know what to say to a lens so well done.

Opinion: Today I tried this lens on my Canon EOS 1DS-MK2.Sono Left stunned when I took a picture in the foreground with very little light, with ISO 50 setting third of a second aperture 2.8 to 200mm. if I can get the inserisco.Io that even now I have always cherished the fixed lenses, this lens should I start to change my mind, I think that me going to buy.

avatarjunior
sent on August 04, 2014

Pros: Sharpness, blur, stabilizer, quality / price ratio

Cons: Weight. But in line with the others in the category. Hood decidedly cumbersome.

Opinion: Excellent sharpness at TA, I have not tried it yet other openings because I fell in love that has made at f2.8!: DrnLo blurred is very pleasant, the stabilizer allows you to shoot at 1/15 handheld at 200mm! Quality / price ratio unmatched. Who could ask for more? A Nikon VRII? Maybe for the "Nikon loyalists," I do not need it: D

avatarjunior
sent on July 02, 2014

Pros: sharpness wide open, quality / price ratio, excellent construction, AF phenomenal

Cons: difficult to find the multipliers tamron

Opinion: is a few months that I have this lens, and I am one of many who has put tons of time to choose what to buy ... but as soon as I got to test it first-hand all doubt svanito.rnsfocato is really nice, lightning-fast autofocus , excellent sharpness already at 2.8 weight average of this range of focal lengths. rnPersonalmente I do not consider justified the price gap between the original nikon and canon, which will also be better in some details, but there are definitely those 800 € to differenza.rnBrava tamron

avatarsenior
sent on May 29, 2014

Pros: A great 70-200 f2.8 stabilized, mechanically and optically very good especially, good quality / price ratio.

Cons: Slight drop in sharpness at f2.8 at 200mm, from testing it seems that the focal length indicated is greater than the real one. AF ring too thin.

Opinion: For those looking for a lens of this type and with excellent optical quality can choose between this or the more expensive equivalent original, obviously better in certain caratteristiche.rnLa optical quality is remarkable: high sharpness already at f2.8, closing at f4 or f5 6 is a blade to any focale.rnCome often happens worsens in sharpness at maximum zoom range, this Canon series II is superior. It is still quite usable at 200mm (actually less mm) f2.8. Chromatic aberrations are well controlled, I would say essentially absent, as well as the distortion is almost nulla.rnSfocato personally very pleasant and beautiful colors: warm and saturated without strange dominanti.rnL 'AF is fast and silent and the grand opening helps the car to find fire, I have not encountered problems with F / B focus. The focus ring is very thin, it is still practical and in an easily number accessibile.rnDi the hood well-built plastic and the ring for the treppiede in metallo.rnIl weather sealed body is solid, the first part is made of metal while the final part quality polycarbonate. This limits the weight, slightly lower than the original competition, but also the impression of robustezza.rnStabilizzatore effective, it needs a few seconds to work best but allows a 3 stop advantage of real and is soft in the intervention.

user42215
avatarjunior
sent on April 02, 2014

Pros: Good sharpness

Cons: Slight vignetting

Opinion: I think the detail is amazing, comparable to the Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8. The distortion is less and presents only a slight chromatic aberration exceeding 70-200 f/2.8 (but equal to the F / 4) and the vignetting is correctable is greater but really with little effort. . .

avatarsenior
sent on March 25, 2014

Pros: Sharpness, MAF, Stabilization, Noise

Cons: I am not able to find fault, especially considering the price .... maybe the lack of a hard case to not put stress on the backpack / bag and shoulder / back!

Opinion: Given that I am not a professional, and even less own a laboratory for a scientific test .... what impressed me most about this light is the sharpness at any focal length and aperture (use "cum grano salis" function or sharpness indeed no do not use it), followed by the speed of focus and stabilization. I also got to try the Nikon 70-200 f / 2.8 VR II in respect of which the Tamron, in my opinion, should not have any "awe" .... in fact it has a great price-performance ratio remarkable! The only judgment that I leave pending is related to reliability in time ... but here I think no one can even pronounce! In conclusion, IMHO, excellent perspective !!

avatarjunior
sent on February 22, 2014

Pros: Virtually all ...

Cons: ... Only the weight ... but is in line with all other 70-200 f2, 8 commercially

Opinion: Purchased this week to replace my former canon 70-200 f2, 8 IS USM first series due to problems of MAF and blur. After a thorough analysis of all the tests on the web convinced me to buy my second Tamron lens (24-70 f2, 8 Di VC USD). What can I say ... it's perfect ... I use it on my 5D MarkIII and is simply fantastic, speed of MAF also excellent in low light conditions, stabilizer efficienteissimo (hi took pictures at 1/60 and 1/30 to 200 mm perfect without even the slightest shake-). I was amazed by the sharpness of this lens compared to my former bianchino canon.rnSino last month I had only aims L series canon (the 24-105 F4, replaced with the Tamron 24-70 f2, 8 Di VC USD with whom I notice can not even be compared in view of the excessive difference in favor of the Tamron), now I can only advise that if you are thinking of buying it to try it in any negozio.rn

avatarsenior
sent on February 07, 2014

Pros: Great lens well built, perfect lenses and focus quickly and accurately

Cons: Perhaps the only downside is the weight, but when the result is that you can forgive

Opinion: The use of Nikon FF for a few weeks, absolutely great accoppiata.rnHo got, making hotel before the purchase, so try this in mind as the equal of the Nikon ... sincerely for the same result I preferred the Tamron because of this prezzo.rnL 'I bought it on amazon at a great price and arrived quickly

avatarjunior
sent on October 29, 2013

Pros: Great lens well built af precise and fast stabilization excellent, no noise.

Cons: only drawback is the weight.

Opinion: The use of the Mark III velocity of focus is very good for my kind of pictures even in low light where no misfires, high definition, even in TA, I am convinced that he had made a great choice since 1000 Euros less the Canon, no problems with front back focus, Tamron has done a fantastic lens as the 24-70 f2.8!

avatarsenior
sent on October 01, 2013

Pros: Optical nice well built.

Cons: angry l'ho 2 months I have not yet found (defects)

Opinion: on 5d mark 3 is excellent do not think he to envy the canon 70/200 f 2.8 Series 2. files obtained are excellent. I purchased seeing the MTF tests on all photographers, is higher than the canon of the same focal length is not less than the old series and the new serie2. I know rnnon post photos on the site but they are of a high caliber.

avatarjunior
sent on March 26, 2013

Pros: Well built, excellent optical quality, lighter and cheaper counterparts of Canon and Nikon

Cons: Does not interact with the camera, as regards the correction of vignetting and chromatic aberration.

Opinion: I have a 5D Mark II and I could try the lens for a week, thanks to a dealer friend who had sold me the Canon counterpart and wanted my opinion on the field. I can say that the resolution and the image quality is excellent. It 'just slower than the Canon nell'autofocus during photo hunting of birds. Costs 600 euro less, according to the price of the dealer in question and I think the savings will affect your choice. Of course, my evidence is empirical: Mac screen (2500 to 1400) and Photoshop camera Raw, magnification 100/200 per cent and looking up at the corners of the image, with some cropping and subsequent printing. Great lens. LuTaf.





 ^

JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.

Mobile Version - juza.ea@gmail.com - Terms of use and Privacy - Cookie Preferences - P. IVA 01501900334 - REA 167997- PEC juzaphoto@pec.it

May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me