 Great lens at the great price. The best lens of Tamron. Nikon version. |
| Review Date: July 24, 2008 |
| Reviewer: S. Ngo, MO, USA |
I have used this lens 3 weeks so far, took around 300 pictures. This is the greatest lens Tamron has ever made, I think! I were so surprised about its optical performance, far more than what I expected!! I owned Tamron 28-75 before and this lens is even much better optically. Super sharp in all aperture stops, even at 2.8 ! The colors are very true-to-life and bokeh are so wonderful, creamy. The AF is pretty accurate although not very quiet ( on my D80), but still quieter than the Nikon 80-200 I tried before. The weight: lightest in the class. Built: very nice.You can take off the tripod collar easily to make it much lighter if you don't need a tripod. If you don't shoot pro and fast sports to earn money, this lens will meet all your needs. The only missing on this lens is VC ( or VR). But you can not require that at this price! Get it, and you will happy with it.
|
Simply Outstanding
|
| Review Date: September 7, 2008 |
| Reviewer: Philip Loria, |
I have had this lens for a few weeks and it hasn't been off my d300. It's sharp at 2.8 and razor sharp by 5.6. In fact at 5.6 I can't tell it from my Sigma 150 macro. It pairs very well with my Sigma 1.4 TC though the EXIF data is 1 f stop faster than reality. Macro mode is very good and with the 1.4 TC is excellent.
It can be a bit slow to AF in dim light or in macro mode focusing on small objects. If I could only have one lens this would be it.
PL |
light weight and extremely sharp.
|
| Review Date: June 14, 2008 |
| Reviewer: Howard Liu, |
| quality glass, light weight design, tripod collar can be removed even mounted, focus is fast and accurate, but did it with a noise and impatient way. produce exceptional bokeh and generate vivid color. A++ item. |
An excellent alternative to those "high priced" lenses
|
| Review Date: October 21, 2008 |
| Reviewer: James T. Walczak, Cleveland Ohio |
After using this lens for a few weeks now, I have to say that I am simply floored by the quality. Using this lens with a Canon 40D, the image quality has been simply superb. Sharpness, color, focus, etc., have all been right on the nose. More over, compared with other "3rd party" lenses, this lens is also quiet and rather fast focusing.
When I first opened the package I will admit that I was rather surprised by the weight of this lens. According to the specs, it's still the lightest lens in it's class, but being a fixed fast, aperture lens (f/2.8), it is still rather heavy...something to be aware of if you have neck problems. That said, the build quality of this lens is top notch. The focus and zoom are both steady and sure, the new auto/manual selector is very nice (once you get used to it) and the fit and finish is very nice indeed. No this lens doesn't have weather sealing o-rings, so I would not recommend it for "extreme" shooting conditions (such as in a desert or the arctic or something) but beyond that this is a serious piece of equipment for your arsenal.
If you are one of those "lens snobs" who will ONLY own L lenses because having that big ol' white chunk of metal on the front of your camera somehow makes you feel special, then this probably isn't the lens for you. However if you are open minded and looking for a great alternative to those high priced lenses, the new Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 is definitely worth a look. For the price this lens just can't be beat! |
Tamron takes Nikon/Canon to the optical wood shed!
|
| Review Date: February 10, 2009 |
| Reviewer: James A. Humberg, Spokane, WA USA |
With Nikon and Canon throwing buckets of money at Pop Photo and other magazines, it's hard to get a respectable review of a third party lens! And those rabid Canon/Nikon owners, bawling about a little noise during focusing, or a slight click, or it ain't pretty enough,and no built in stabilisation, in their eyes, there isn't anything good with Tamron or other third party lenses when compared to their overpriced lenses, except for the price and optical superiority in some instances on the part of those awful Non-Canon/Nikon lens producers.
True a $1,600.00 Canon lens seems unbeatable judging by the price and that pretty white Canon lens look! But I found out the real truth about the Tamron 70-200 F:2.8's side-by-side comparison to the Canon equivalent, and it made the Canon seem like a Vivitar knock-off. To quote the reviewer, the Canon 70-200 F:2.8...had "VISIBLE BARRELING AND PINCUSHIONING" compared to the Tamron 70-200 F:2.8. Later I tried to find that same review for a second look, and Canon had it pulled until another fabrication could come out making them look like the cat's pajamas once more to the camera world at large!
I did have a minor aperture problem with my Tamron 70-200, but the company replaced the lens no questions asked. While taking a vacation trip along the Columbia River last Spring, I took a shot of a Tugboat and barge going up river from a mile away,I could almost read the name on the life ring outside the pilot house.
The saturation and sharpness of the lens was incredible. Night shots and Portraits and 1:3 macro close-ups are almost too sharp to discribe, and all with my 6MP K100d Pentax.
Yes the HSM focusing system on the Canon will outshoot this lens hands down, but if the optics can't take decent architechtural shots without making them look like a barrel or corsette, what does it matter the price?
I don't rate a lens by the ambiance or the bokay, but due to my 40 years of artistic and technical knowledge of lenses in general, It took me five months to decide between the Tamron and the Sigma 70-200's build, and the reason for my decision over the Sigma, was that it took five ED glass lenses to correct for chromatics in the Sigma and only two for the Tamron, making it optically better, and this was corroborated by a lens technician of 15 years at another third party lens company who worked with his products and comparing them with all brands of lenses, and grew to understand why the need for ED glass...
Why add ED glass? If the chromatics and light transference are high, less correction? See my point? Companies don't like to put ED glass into their lenses because it is expensive! It just sounds good in print, when in all actuality, it means that the Optical Design has need to be tweeked for the light to properly focus on the sensor, without chromatic fringing.
So to sum up my diatribe, if you are an ardent amateur photographer or a sharp freelancer, and ain't worried about a little Buzz, click or whirr, when your lens takes a darn sharp photograph, then stick with optical performance, and not a name, look, or extreme price tag when purchasing a new lens.
It took Tamron five months to fill all the Nikon/Canon orders before they could start filling the Pentax orders! Go Figure! Doesn't that say something about this F:2.8 70-200 Tamron wonder? So why did I opt for the Tamron lens? Read on!
Tamron, Sigma, Tokina, Vivitar, and Soligor have been taking it to Nikon/Canon/Pentax/Olympus and Minolta for years, and if these photo giants had their way, they would like to wave a magic wand, and do away with these third party Optical upstarts...Yesterday! |
|
No video reviews found for this product.
Responses to “Tamron AF 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD IF Macro Lens with Built in Motor for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras”
Leave a Reply