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

[NVSteve]

Okay, so I took the Tamron out for a spin this morning. I have had absolutely no time to do anything, so I haven't checked back/front focus on the lens yet. That being said, the event I shot was the Color Run. Lots of people, lots of fast movement. The kicker is that all 1200+ shots were taken at f2.8 only and AF-C. That meant many parts of each image were not in focus, and the areas that were within my center focus point had to be focused. I'm pleased for the most part, although the images are a tad soft, which really makes me want to test it out at all apertures soon (although I don't have time). There was plenty of room for user error, especially with so many moving objects within the frame at different distances. Move one hair in any direction with AF-C & I end up focusing on something else. As to AF, it is extremely fast. I'm not talking about going from near focus to infinity, but locking focus on a subject that is moving closer or farther away. In my usage, the AF easily felt as fast as the Nikon f4. Here are some samples (more on my flickr page):

 

[frtorres87]

Good stuff! I noticed that even though you shot at f2.8 I didn't see much vignetting in your images. I've heard a lot that this lens vignettes but I haven't bumped into that problem yet and from the looks on these sample images you haven't either. Please continue to post more.

 

[Rick M]

Nice shots Steve, I'll be interested in your thoughts vs. the Nikon f4.

 

[Krs_2007]

Nice shots, same as Rick here, curious about a comparison with the F4 70-200.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[NVSteve]

frtorres87: I didn't even think to check for vignetting. I just loaded them up into LR and applied a number of adjustments across the board, one of which was the lens correction. Also, I cropped pretty much every single one of them in Photoshop because there were just too many stray arms, hands, heads & what have you in virtually every frame. So, if the lens correction didn't work as it should have, the cropping surely did away with it. I'll have to try and remember to check for vignetting the next round, although I won't be shooting hardly anything at f2.8. Of course I didn't keep any of the NEFs, as I didn't think any of them were really keepers.

Here's 3 more, but at full resolution. I don't believe the first was cropped at all.

Rick & Kevin: I hope to do some tests in the next couple of weeks. Priority right now is finding out if the Tamron will be a keeper, which does involve testing it against the f4 to see how well/worse it is. All I can do for now is show you the 3 lenses I want to cross compare:

 

[NVSteve]

PS-I apologize for the haphazard look of my posts. Stupid IE10 REALLY doesn't get along well with this site & I always forget to use Firefox until it's too late.

 

[frtorres87]

Steve is that the Tamron 70-300 VC? I'd like to see some sample shots of the 70-200 against that lens too if you could. I'm interested in purchasing that lens also. I wanted to post some sample shots from the graduation party I was shooting. Very sharp images from the 70-200

My wife being silly.

Also, all vignetting in these two images were Added.

 

[Rick M]

Nice shots frtorres87! That lens must be huge on the D5100!

 

[frtorres87]

Nice shots frtorres87! That lens must be huge on the D5100!

It's actually on my D7100 with the grip, I think I have to update my signature.

 

[NVSteve]

Steve is that the Tamron 70-300 VC? I'd like to see some sample shots of the 70-200 against that lens too if you could.

I'll see what I can do.

 

[NVSteve]

Here's a video (not mine) for all the fixated naysayers concerning the AF speed: Sigma 70 200 OS VS Tamron 70 200 VC - YouTube

 

[NVSteve]

A few from yesterday. Nothing exciting-just wanted to hurry and get some more lens testing in. Problem with shooting in sunny conditions is that I'm usually wearing sunglasses, which means I can't see squat as far as settings on the camera. I must have mistakenly set ISO to auto or something else while shooting, because half of my shots ended up being in the ISO 500 range.

A few 100% crops:

 

[frtorres87]

A few from yesterday. Nothing exciting-just wanted to hurry and get some more lens testing in. Problem with shooting in sunny conditions is that I'm usually wearing sunglasses, which means I can't see squat as far as settings on the camera. I must have mistakenly set ISO to auto or something else while shooting, because half of my shots ended up being in the ISO 500 range.

A few 100% crops:

Pictures came out sharp Steve. What are your thoughts on this lens so far?

 

[NVSteve]

Pictures came out sharp Steve. What are your thoughts on this lens so far?

I'm liking it. I think for what I need it for, which is 200mm at f2.8, it will work. I just know I need to make a decision on keeping it real soon.

I did manage to get outside with the tripod today. I have samples from the Nikon f4, Tamron 70-200 VC and the Tamron 70-300 VC. I was going to post them up to flickr, but wanted to ask if I should edit them first as I normally would (although without any lens corrections), or leave them as-is. I was just looking through them in Lightroom with everything set to zero, no sharpening, etc. For me personally, they all look like crap when not edited somewhat, but I'll post them however any of you like.

 

[Michael J.]

NVSteve, post them I wanna take a look how they came out of camera.

 

[frtorres87]

NVSteve, post them I wanna take a look how they came out of camera.

I agree. Post them as is Steve

 

[NVSteve]

Sometimes I really hate the internet & our reliance on tech in general. I posted a reply, only to find out I wasn't logged in on Firefox, so that will pop up at some point. I'll post the link as soon as all of the pics have uploaded.

 

[NVSteve]

Here you go, all full resolution: Camera Testing - a set on Flickr

Here are 3 (100% if you open in a new window) crops from the 3 lenses. #3 is the Tamron 70-300VC. 1 & 2 look pretty similar, no?

From what I've seen published, the Nikon f4 is a true 200mm at 200, whereas the Tamron is something like 186mm at 200. They look very close to me & absolutely non-relevant for my uses:

 

[frtorres87]

They look spot on! I think Matt Granger recently didn't another head to head with the Tamron, Nikon and Canon 70-200 and he said the Tamron was a True 70-200. The 70-300 Tamron isn't as sharp as the others but it's pretty good also. I might pick that lens up soon for the extra distance.

 

[NVSteve]

They look spot on! I think Matt Granger recently didn't another head to head with the Tamron, Nikon and Canon 70-200 and he said the Tamron was a True 70-200. The 70-300 Tamron isn't as sharp as the others but it's pretty good also. I might pick that lens up soon for the extra distance.

Yeah, the 70-300 is pretty good. It doesn't hold up to the other 2, but it does have that 200-300 range the other 2 are lacking. And it's fairly light & incredibly inexpensive. To me, the Nikon f4 feels almost identical in weight to the 70-300.

One thing to mention about the samples I posted on flickr-the Tamron 70-200 70mm shots are all labeled as 75 in the picture name. When I was going through the EXIFs for each, I discovered the Tamron was at 75 instead of 70.