Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Review

[SEMiller]

Re FTW, I'm wondering which one he meant?

FTW Face the World
FTW Families Than Work
FTW Feel The Wind
FTW Fight to Win
FTW Florida Tax Watch
FTW Flying Training Wing
FTW For the Weak
FTW For the World
FTW For Those Wondering
FTW Forever Two Wheels
FTW Forget The World (polite form)
FTW Forschungszentrum Telekommunikation Wien (Vienna, Austria)
FTW Fort Wainwright, Alaska
FTW Fort Worth Meacham Field (Airport Code)
FTW Forward Towards Wing (Hattrick, online game)
FTW Frank the Welder (mountain bikes)
FTW Free the Weed
FTW Free the Whales
FTW Free The Wookies (humor)
FTW Free Trade Wharf
FTW Future Technology Workshop
FTW F**k the World

Also, note the lack of a reply after challenging him on his lack of focus assertion.

 

[Pretzel]

Wondering also and what's with FTW I know what that means and it's usually an immature 16 year old that uses it.

Re FTW, I'm wondering which one he meant?

Also, note the lack of a reply after challenging him on his lack of focus assertion.

Side track:

I see this a lot, and with the context, think it applies... FTW = For The Win. I, as a "mature" 44 year old used to use it a LOT, like: "Ribeye Steak, Medium Rare FTW!" etc. It wasn't until someone recently asked me about the other "offensive" interpretation that I quit using it and just started spelling it out...

Also, it seems like he wasn't a HUGELY active poster in the forum, so maybe he just hasn't checked back yet, or just randomly browses? Maybe he'll come back and answer, maybe he won't, but it wasn't like he's a one post wonder...

Don't always assume the worst! Just my opinion, FWIW (For What It's Worth... not F* With It Willis or anything else...)

Ok, back to your normal on topic discussions. Have a nice day!

 

[vindex1963]

FTW=Fast to Work
FTW=fiddle'in to widdle'in

 

[vindex1963]

Still loving this lens. I'm hooked the 70-200 VC and the 24-70 VC are the best buys I've made.

1. Sears-Kay Indian Ruin

2.Sears-Kay Indian Ruin

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

 

[vindex1963]

Don't you love it when you buy a lens and after some time and use you realize it's worth more than you paid for it to you if that makes sense. The IQ continues to amaze me.
D700
f/3.5
1/125
VC off
Spot metered
112mm
tripod
Ryobi flashlight lighting :smile:

 

[ihanson]

Hey all,

Glad to see that you're having good experiences with this lens - I'm on the fence about to buy and had a question for anyone that would like to answer. I can see that this lens works just fine in outdoors situations with plenty of natural light, however I'm curious about how it does in relatively low light with some action - could be indoor or night sports under stadium lighting, indoor wedding shots, or a relatively dark concert venue. Can anyone chime in on low light performance, especially when shooting active subjects? I have a Nikon 70-300 VR that works great out in daylight, so for me the main justification for this lens would be for getting great shots in less than ideal lighting conditions like I can with my Nikon 17-55 2.8. Thanks for any input and samples!

 

[NVSteve]

I'm curious about how it does in relatively low light with some action - could be indoor or night sports under stadium lighting, indoor wedding shots, or a relatively dark concert venue. Can anyone chime in on low light performance, especially when shooting active subjects?

Well, I can give you an answer to that, but not until next month. The US speedskating Olympic Trials are at the end of December & I have tickets in hand. What I can say is that I've shoot speedskating before, along with gymnastics, with the Nikon 70-200 f4. The f4 did a fantastic job with no problems, but I really need that extra stop. Since the f4 has done so well, I'm assuming my Tamron f2.8 will do even better.

On an off note, a friend of mine decided to get married over the weekend (24 hour notice) and I ended up shooting it for him. With indoor events, I usually have everything locked down & never fiddle with any of the settings. This wedding was a bit different because it was right as the sun was setting, with both movement and non-movement. I really need to remind myself to up the shutter speeds in these situations because I did get a bit of blur, although I took enough pictures that ultimately I did also have enough that were sharp, or at least sharp enough for him. Before the wedding, I was wandering around with the 24-120 and am still very impressed with that lens. Anyway, here is one from the wedding using the Tamron (nobody wanted their faces out on the net):

 

[vindex1963]

Well, I can give you an answer to that, but not until next month. The US speedskating Olympic Trials are at the end of December & I have tickets in hand. What I can say is that I've shoot speedskating before, along with gymnastics, with the Nikon 70-200 f4. The f4 did a fantastic job with no problems, but I really need that extra stop. Since the f4 has done so well, I'm assuming my Tamron f2.8 will do even better.

Looking forward to seeing and hearing how well it worked....or not but I bet it will.

 

[vindex1963]

 

[PapaST]

I'm looking at the Nikon 70-200 vs the Tamron 70-200 for myself. I like how this lens has graded out compared to its Holy Trinity counterpart. I just might buy this lens over the Nikon for $1,000 less and my indirect way of telling Nikon I don't approve of how they handled the D600. Great pics everyone!

 

[vindex1963]

If you have any faith in chart and graph sites here you go.

 

[ShootRaw]

Ha...I my oldest is 13yrs old...So Im far from being 16yrs old..haha

 

[SEMiller]

To the poster who asked about low light, this is an evening photo, hand held, no flash - just available light and without any post processing. As such it is not bad and would only be better after it's processed.

 

[Krs_2007]

Looks good, thanks

 

[cadomniel]

This lens was on amazon Canada for $1,099CAD last week and I was quite tempted as it is on my list and that is a fantastic price but it will have to wait a bit longer
It seems like a bargain compared to the Nikon VRII

 

[SEMiller]

You will not be disappointed in this lens, I believe it stacks up well against the Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR II (check the DXOmark test results, see link above) especially for its price. Downsides are it will lose value just like buying a new car, the Nikon will for the most part hold it's value, important if you ever would need to sell it, and maybe it's not as sturdy as the Nikon.

This lens fits my needs, I don't think I would ever sell it (I rarely sell equipment, and if I would it would be a body not a lens), I don't need the lens to make a living, it is insured with my other equipment and I live on Long Island not far from Tamron US headquarters, so if I had a problem I would just walk in with it. And I got it for a great price plus the $100 rebate they were offering over the summer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[vindex1963]

This lens has become my "go to" lens. Never missed a focus and it seems to like my D700 I can't hardly get it to come off.

 

[NVSteve]

Still wondering if I might have a bit of front or back focus on mine. I'll have to play around with some adjustments when I get a chance. Works well in 12 degree weather:

And to show a bit more of the bokeh:

 

[NVSteve]

I had some time last night, so I pulled out the monster Bogen tripod and set up a few targets. I took shots from 0 to -20 (lens adjustment on the D600), and only a few on the + side. After scrutinizing the resulting images, I couldn't tell a difference anywhere from 0 to -20. Dialing in +20 made an obvious difference, in the wrong direction. I'll just make do with the fact that the Tamron is a bit soft at f2.8 & 200mm. We'll see what happens at speedskating in a couple of weeks.

 

[Marcel]

Still wondering if I might have a bit of front or back focus on mine. I'll have to play around with some adjustments when I get a chance. Works well in 12 degree weather:

And to show a bit more of the bokeh:

Could be Steve, but with glass subjects, it's really hard to know if it's the subject or the lens. You should try with something opaque so you can see where the focus is done by the lens.