Tamron Sp 70-200mm F/28 Di Usd Zoom Lens for Sony Review

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

While the Tamron seventy-200mm f/2.viii Di VC USD Lens is not Tamron'due south get-go lxx-200mm f/2.viii lens, it is their first version to include vibration control. VC alone is a swell upgrade characteristic, but the upgraded prototype quality in this lens is besides big bonus. This lens lxx-200 VC overall great prototype quality and skilful functioning at a moderate price.

There are few of u.s. that tin can't make neat apply of a stabilized 70-200mm f/two.8 lens. The 70-200mm focal length is what I ofttimes recommend for a photographer's 2d lens. This focal length range falls nicely higher up most general purpose zoom lenses and works well for more-afar subjects or for more than-compressed perspectives.

Hither are a pair of 70-200mm focal length range examples.

The New York Metropolis skyline comparison was photographed from Liberty Park in Weehawken, NJ.

APS-C/1.6x FOVCF sensor format DSLR owners will become an angle of view similar to a full frame 112-320mm lens.

Take kids? Or grandkids? This is a great lens to chase them around with. I commonly recommend such a lens for portraits, for weddings, parties, concerts and other indoor events, for indoor and outdoor sports, for landscapes and for large and/or close wildlife.

Disquisitional for many uses, and especially critical for an indoor event lens, is stabilization. This lens has it, Tamron calls it vibration command (VC) and it works very well. The Tamron 70-200 VC'due south iv-terminate epitome vibration control keeps the viewfinder stable on startup and shutdown and keeps its presence down by being very placidity. You will hear some calorie-free fluttering in the lens until the stabilizer fully starts, but it is and so very quiet.

Throughout this review, I will exist comparing the Tamron lxx-200 VC to the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.eight EX DG Os HSM Lens and the Catechism EF lxx-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM Lens. In regards to stabilization audio, the Sigma OS (Optical Stabilization) and Canon IS (Prototype Stabilization) lenses are both louder – both make an hands audible click when starting and stopping. The Canon provides a less-jittery paradigm than either the Tamron or Sigma when adjusting the framing while stabilization is active.

My success with the Tamron's VC very closely matches my success with the Canon'south IS and modestly bests my success with Sigma'due south OS. At 70mm, I am getting a very good keeper rate at 1/8 seconds with a still-good sharpness charge per unit down to .3 seconds. At 200mm, 1/15 second exposures are generally quite successful.

These results stand for about iv-stops of help from VC for me. With each end representing a 2x difference in the amount of light needed to handhold a shot, 4 stops of assistance is significant. Every bit long every bit the bailiwick is not moving.

From an image quality perspective, the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens impresses. From 70mm through 135mm, with a broad open f/2.eight aperture, images are quite sharp from the heart to the outer full frame paradigm circle. At 200mm, a small-scale drop in sharpness can be noticed.

Narrowing the aperture 1 stop from broad open up commonly improves the image quality delivered by a lens. And in this case, the improvement is modest over most of the focal length range - and modest is all that is needed to be fully impressive save at 200mm. At 200mm, the improvement at f/4 is more than noticeable (and more needed). 200mm f/four corners are nonetheless showing slight softness that is better-resolved with an f/5.6 aperture setting.

The Tamron seventy-200 VC has noticeably better image quality than the Sigma 70-200 Os at f/2.8. The differences are less noticeable at f/4, but the Tamron remains the prototype quality leader except at 200mm where the Sigma performs better in the corners.

Yous buy a 70-200 f/two.viii to utilize at f/2.8. Otherwise, buy a Canon EF seventy-200mm f/four L IS USM Lens. It will give you lot modestly better epitome quality in a smaller and lighter parcel – with a lower price tag. Thus, I feel that for near, the Tamron VC is a amend choice than the Sigma OS from an paradigm sharpness perspective.

The Canon 70-200 L IS 2 is perhaps the all-time zoom lens I've ever used – and represents a very formidable competitor to any lens in this class. Surprising is that, at its lower price indicate, the Tamron 70-200 VC delivers image quality very close to the Canon IS 2 until the long terminate of the focal length range where the Canon easily bests the Tamron. Earlier deciding that you lot are going to give up that Canon advantage for the lower price, think that nosotros tend to most-utilize the total extents of the focal length range in our zoom lenses. And 200mm is perhaps the most important focal length in a 70-200mm f/ii.8 stabilized lens. The better 200mm image quality is as well translated into better with-extender prototype quality at the 200mm focal length setting.

The 70-200 VC has noticeably better f/ii.8 image quality than its predecessor, the Tamron 70-200mm f/two.eight Di Macro Lens. This comparison at f/2.8 shows perhaps the most-improved focal length. Stopped down aperture comparisons between these two lenses show more similarity.

Equally is common, at a 2-terminate narrower than wide open aperture (f/5.6), image sharpness is no longer a significant differentiator between all of these lenses. The Canon still delivers slightly better paradigm quality, but the playing field is far more level.

Adding to the 70-200 VC'southward soft corner look at the longer focal lengths is a modest corporeality of CA (Chromatic Aberration) showing there. The various wavelengths of lite are not existence focused identically in the mid and peripheral portions of the epitome circumvolve. Aside from a slight amount of CA at 70mm, this lens is substantially CA-free otherwise.

Expect seventy-200 VC full frame f/2.8 corner shading to be near 2 stops at 70mm, 1.5 stops at 100mm, 2 stops at 135mm and 2.5 stops at 200mm. Equally always stopping down reducing the vignetting. F/iv reduces vignetting by .5 - 1 end and f/5.six affects a more pocket-size reduction. A minor .5 stops remains visible in 200mm f/8 corners.

How does the two-terminate difference in 200mm f/2.8 vs. f/8 vignetting compare in a real world full frame paradigm? Observe below.

My archer model apparently was not stationary between my shots (or her shots?), but the sky did non move. The corner shading tin exist used to depict the viewer'due south heart to your subject field. Or more depth of field with less peripheral light fall-off can be achieved by using a narrower aperture such as f/eight (observe that the bow remains in focus).

APS-C format DSLR owners seldom have much to worry virtually regarding vignetting from total frame compatible lenses. And this is in one case again the instance with the seventy-200mm VC. Expect a just-noticeable 1 stop of vignetting at 200mm f/2.8.

The Tamron 70-200 VC's vignetting pattern is very similar to the Sigma 70-200 OS'south with the Sigma having slightly more than vignetting at 200mm f/ii.viii. The Catechism seventy-200 IS II has less vignetting – as much as .v stops less at f/2.viii. The stopped down differences are, as expected, less.

With 23 lenses in 17 groups, it is not surprising that the 70-200 VC shows a noticeable amount of flaring with a bright light in the frame - similar the competitors. The Sigma, with 18 lenses in xv groups, shows but slightly less flare and the Canon with 23 lenses in nineteen groups shows very slightly more than. The differences are not enough to be differentiators from my perspective.

Zoom lenses, as a strong rule, show barrel distortion at the wide end and pincushion distortion at the long end of their focal length range. The big unknowns are generally: How strong is the distortion? And where is the nigh-0 distortion crossover indicate? The Tamron seventy-200mm VC lens brings no surprises with a modest amount of barrel distortion at 70mm, a crossover point in the 85mm neighborhood and a modest amount of pincushion past 200mm. The Sigma and Canon lenses are non considerably different in regards to distortion.

Likewise not much unlike is the quality of the groundwork blur (bokeh) these lenses produce. The Canon uses an 8-blade rounded design while the Tamron and Sigma apply nine-blade rounded designs.

Here is a 200mm bokeh comparison created using a stationary camera position with the lenses focused at the same altitude. Obvious is that the Canon is producing larger blur details – even with a 1-stop narrower aperture (the f/11 instance). The Canon has a longer truthful focal length than the Sigma and Tamron lenses – peculiarly at short focus distances. I'll talk more most this after in the review, but the Tamron besides has modestly less focal length than the Sigma in this case.

Bated from the difference in the magnification of the blurred subjects, I don't see any differentiating qualities in the results of this comparison. All three lenses are looking good.

Overall, the Tamron 70-200mm f/two.8 Di VC USD Lens is quite impressive from an paradigm quality perspective. I would like to see better sharpness from the important 200mm f/2.viii setting, simply this lens otherwise performs very well. The more expensive Catechism remains the better pick, but the Tamron's paradigm quality would be my easy choice over the Sigma. Compare these lenses using the epitome quality comparison tool linked to at the top of the each review. You volition meet the differences.

As indicated past the "USD" acronym in its proper noun, the 70-200mm f/ii.viii VC Lens uses Tamron's relatively new and very overnice Ultrasonic Bulldoze for autofocusing. This implementation of USD is tranquillity (y'all can hear a "shhhh" sound if you listen advisedly) and fast. Fast enough that it is difficult to discern a difference between it and the Canon EF lxx-200mm f/two.8 L IS II Lens in side-by-side comparison over total near-minimum to most-infinity focus distance adjustments. And the Tamron is noticeably faster than the Sigma lxx-200 OS in this comparing. With more normal focus distance adjustments, the Catechism focuses very noticeably faster and the Sigma becomes more comparable to the Tamron. Pain the Tamron are the fine-tuning adjustments made after the initial nearly-in-focus state is achieved.

Focusing is internal (filter threads practise not rotate with focusing) and FTM (Full Fourth dimension Transmission) focusing is supported. I usually much prefer having FTM, but the rear-positioned focus ring makes this characteristic a fleck of a liability. With my left paw resting on this ring, it is possible to inadvertently change the focus altitude setting while composing the final image framing.

No focus distance limiter switch is provided.

One shot AF has proven accurate, though my copy of the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens has a slight, just consistent backfocusing issue on both of my Canon 5D Marker 3 cameras. Consequent backfocusing can be corrected by AFMA - or by the manufacturer. Information technology is the inconsistent focus accurateness issues that render a lens far less useful.

I gave the 70-200 VC's AF system a few skilful AI Servo workouts. And it performs reasonably well a majority of the time.

Troubling is that this lens, at random, will completely neglect these tests. I tin can be shooting a 12 fps Canon 1D X bursts with each frame existence in-focus until, for no credible reason, every frame becomes strongly out of focus. The lens ordinarily fails to recover from this land until a new flare-up is started. Information technology is like the lens AF organisation loses its bulldoze train.

I have strings of twenty+ completely blurred shots. The out of focus images can start on the first shot of a sequence or can show upwards deep into a outburst – when the discipline is typically closer and faster-endmost the relative distance to the camera. When this bibelot happens, no AF point shows in Canon DPP's Quick View. Aside from this occasional issue, I am satisfied with AI Servo performance.

Note that the Tamron 24-seventy VC and 70-200 VC reportedly have the aforementioned ID from a Nikon DSLR standpoint. This means that whatsoever autofocus adjustment done in-camera volition affect both lenses similarly. If this is your situation, ship the lenses in demand of calibration to Tamron.

Videographers should note that lxx-200 VC subjects change size a noticeable amount during focus pulling at 200mm, simply subjects practise non change size most as much at 70mm. This lens performs better than the Canon IS 2, only not also every bit the Sigma OS, in this regard.

This lens is non parfocal. Zooming from 200mm to 70mm volition shift focus to a longer distance. This inverse also remains truthful – zooming from 70mm to 200mm volition shift focus to a shorter distance. As with virtually zoom lenses, refocus afterward changing the focal length.

Model	MFD		MM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/ii.8 L IS II USM Lens	47.2"	(1200mm)	0.21x
Sigma lxx-200mm f/2.viii EX DG OS HSM Lens	55.1"	(1400mm)	0.13x
Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens	51.two"	(1300mm)	0.13x
Tamron seventy-200mm f/2.viii Di Macro Lens	37.4"	(950mm)	0.32x
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM Lens	47.two"	(1200mm)	0.21x

There are some interesting numbers in the chart above. The Canon f/2.8 IS Ii has a significantly higher maximum magnification (MM) spec than the other f/2.eight prototype stabilized lenses. But, the minimum focus distance (MFD) of these lenses practice not appear that significantly great. And actual MFD testing using manual focus places these lenses even closer than the nautical chart in a higher place indicates (use the measurements and specs link at the top of the review to run into these results). But, the Canon lens indeed produces a very noticeably larger magnification at MFD.

The Sigma gives up significantly more of its focal length at MFD than the Canon does. And the Tamron gives up fifty-fifty more. So, ane of the Tamron and Sigma shared 0.13x MM values does not announced correct. The Tamron all the same does not quite lucifer the Canon for max focal length even at longer focus distances. The Sigma besides trails the Canon somewhat at distance.

This point was driven home for me when I used the Tamron to shoot the product images for the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Lens Review. I could not get the tighter shots I typically get with the Canon 70-200 f/4 IS that I ordinarily employ for these photos.

The lxx-200 VC is certainly not a macro lens, merely unlike its predecessor (and unlike the Sigma 70-200 OS's predecessor), it does not claim to be.

This lens volition work with extension tubes, only extender compatibility is the feature that can make the biggest magnification departure. This lens is compatible with the Tamron 1.4x and 2.0x SP AF Pro Teleconverters.

You add a teleconverter (extender) because you want a longer focal length than is natively institute in the lens – because yous are focal length limited. And this means that yous are primarily interested in the prototype quality of the lens and TC combination at the lens' longest native focal length – 200mm in this case. This is the focal length nosotros lab test the extender combinations at. Unfortunately for the otherwise stellar-performing 70-200 VC, it's longest focal length is its weak bespeak.

Adding a Tamron 1.4x TC to the seventy-200 VC creates a 98-280mm f/4 VC lens. Image sharpness takes a noticeable hit at 280mm with a wide open f/4 aperture. Very good sharpness returns at f/5.half dozen except in the total frame corners that remain soft. The corners are improved at f/8 and further improved at f/xi. The Tamron 1.4x TC adds barrel distortion that helps equalize the lxx-200 VC'south native pincushion distortion.

Adding a Tamron two.0x TC to the 70-200 VC creates a 140-400mm f/five.6 VC lens that retains autofocus capabilities on well-nigh Canon EOS DSLR cameras. Images at 400mm with a wide open f/5.6 aperture are downright blurry. Simply pretend this lens combo has an f/8 max discontinuity for practical employ. And the image quality at f/8 is simply marginal with very poor corner performance. Corners are non good even at f/eleven. Like the 1.4x, the Tamron ii.0x TC adds barrel distortion that helps equalize the 70-200 VC's native pincushion baloney.

Utilise the "Image Quality" tool link at the top of this review to see these test results for yourself.

If you accept used Tamron lenses recently, the Tamron lxx-200mm f/2.viii Di VC USD Lens volition look and feel familiar to you. A slightly shiny plastic lens barrel with wide-spaced, deeply ribbed rubber rings and a gilt name plate ring. While I prefer the Catechism and Sigma from a await and feel perspective, your personal preference may vary.

The Tamron's zoom and focus rings are smooth (very slightly scratchy) with no play. Annotation that these rings rotate in the Nikon-standard direction - opposite that of Canon's lenses (and the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 OS Lens). Information technology takes some aligning if you lot are used to one rotation direction and using a lens that rotates in the opposite direction.

Aiding lens barrel smoothness is the Tamron'southward flush switch panel. The Catechism 70-200 f/2.8 L IS 2 has twice equally many switches in a slightly raised panel, but the switches are nearly flush with the lens barrel just beyond them. The Canon'south ii additional switches command focus distance limit settings and provide IS Mode I and Two setting options. The Sigma has a very noticeably raised switch panel.

I already mentioned that I practise non like the Tamron'south rear-positioned focus ring. In use, my left mitt'south fingers rest on this ring. Especially with the ease that this lens' focus band rotates, there is a real chance that the focus distance setting gets changed subsequently autofocus lock – by my grip on the lens irresolute slightly I strongly prefer the Canon design with the zoom ring in the rear. I also like to be able to change focal length without moving my grip manus forward, and I much adopt the lens balance when actively using the rear-positioned zoom ring.

This lens has a nicely-sized zoom ring and a relatively narrow-simply-quite-usable focus ring. The Canon focus ring has about twice every bit much surface expanse. The Sigma focus ring is almost the aforementioned size every bit the Tamron's, simply information technology has most one-half every bit much rubber grip surface.

The Tamron lxx-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens has less focus ring rotation than either the Canon or the Sigma (sixty° vs. 62° and 72°), simply the difference will be immaterial to most of us. The VC too has slightly more zoom band rotation (143° vs. 137° and 120°). Once again, this difference will be immaterial to most.

I beloved the stock-still-size design trait these seventy-200 f/ii.8 lenses share. In that location is no barrel extension when zooming to a longer focal length.

While Sigma, Canon and Tamron are using quality plastics in their construction, 70-200mm f/2.8 lens blueprint requirements dictate that the weight – and size – of such a lens be noticeable. The weight and size differences betwixt the 3 lenses I've been comparing are insignificant.

Model	Weight		Dimensions w/o Hood		Filter	Year
Canon EF 70-200mm f/ii.8 L IS Two USM Lens	52.6 oz	(1490g)	3.5 x 7.8"	(88.8 10 199mm)	77mm	2010
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Lens	50.5 oz	(1430g)	3.4 x seven.viii"	(86.4 10 197.6mm)	77mm	2011
Tamron seventy-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens	51.ix oz	(1470g)	3.4 10 7.4"	(85.8 10 188.3mm)	77mm	2012
Tamron 70-200mm f/two.8 Di Macro Lens	46.6 oz	(1320g)	three.5 10 vii.6"	(90 x 194mm)	77mm	2008
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.viii L USM Lens	46.2 oz	(1310g)	3.3 10 7.6"	(85 ten 194mm)	77mm	1995
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 Fifty IS USM Lens	26.8 oz	(760g)	3 10 6.8"	(76 x 172mm)	67mm	2006
Canon EF lxx-200mm f/iv L USM Lens	24.9 oz	(705g)	3 x vi.8"	(76 x 172mm)	67mm	1999

For many more than comparisons, review the complete Tamron 70-200mm f/2.eight Di VC USD Lens Specifications using the site's Lens Spec tool.

You are going to know when you have this lens mounted – and you are going to feel the weight in your arms and shoulders if you lot use the lens for hours on end. Merely this is non a hard lens to use for nearly of us.

This lens mounted to a DSLR may not fit in your standard zoom lens case. The Lowepro Toploader Pro 75 AW is a case I often recommend for this comport solution.

Here are the three stabilized 70-200 f/2.8 lenses side-by-side.

Positioned above from left to right in their fully retracted positions are the post-obit lenses:

Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens
Catechism EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS Ii USM Lens
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG Os HSM Lens

The same lenses are shown below in their fully extended states (the same size in this case) with their lens hoods in identify.

We are looking at telephoto lenses here, and with these lens types come a large lens hood (included in the box with each of these three lenses). Large lens hoods take upward more room, but they besides provide cracking protection to the front lens element. Protection from affect, protection from rain and water spray, and of course, protection from the lord's day and other bright lite source.

While the Tamron and Catechism lens hoods are similar in overall length and shape, the Tamron is shallower on the sides. Canon utilizes a flocked interior to absorb all light hit inside the hood while the Tamron and Sigma use a plastic interior with ridges designed to prevent reflections into the lens. The Canon blueprint is more constructive, just ... few will notice the differences to be significant. The Sigma lens hood is longer with less-rounded corners. All three take ends flat enough to allow the lens to sit down upright when balanced on them, but ... apply this technique with circumspection.

The center-pinch lens cap is easily installed or removed even with this big lens hood in place.

As a rule, lxx-200 f/two.eight lenses come up with a tripod ring (these rings are typically optional for the 70-200 f/iv lenses). The Sigma and Tamron tripod rings utilize a hinged design to allow easy removal while a camera is mounted. The Canon tripod ring does not count on a hinge pivot for strength.

Accidentally removing the Canon ring is well-nigh impossible. Accidentally removing the Tamron ring is possible, but not likely as the screw requires about viii total rotations to fully open up. On the other hand, the Sigma quick release friction spiral requires less than 90 degrees of rotation to go from really tight to completely loose. At completely loose, simply a modest tug outward on the release spiral is required to release Sigma lens from the ring. This ease of release makes me a fleck nervous.

The Tamron tripod ring is nearly as smooth-functioning equally the Canon, lacks the Canon's internal release mechanism'south bumps and with plenty of friction adjustment available, desired resistance level tin be dialed in. The release hinge has a sharp edge that volition force you to adapt it so your that paw does not come against it. The Catechism ring allows more than clearance for fingers wrapped around the lens, but the Tamron and Sigma rings are lower profile.

All of these seventy-200mm lenses apply the aforementioned 77mm filter size. While they are non pocket-sized, 77mm filters are 1 of the well-nigh common filter sizes. Y'all volition probably want to have filters for each of your lenses, but having a common filter size permits filter sharing.

You are on your own for a Tamron 70-200mm lens case as none is included in the box.

Like the Catechism 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS Two, the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens is a weather-sealed lens. Those comparison the Tamron to the Sigma seventy-200mm Os should notation that the Sigma is not sealed.

My Tamron 70-200 VC was purchased retail.

The Tamron lxx-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens, at review fourth dimension, is bachelor in Canon (reviewed), Nikon and Sony/Minolta mounts. My standard disclaimer: At that place are potential issues with third party lenses. Since Tamron reverse engineers (vs. licenses) manufacturer AF algorithms, there is always the possibility that a DSLR body might not support a (probable older) third party lens. Sometimes a lens can exist made compatible past the manufacturer, sometimes not. There is also the gamble of a problem that results in the lens and body manufacturers directing blame at each other. Canon's 1 twelvemonth warranty does not compare to Tamron USA's vi-yr warranty.

Why buy a third party/non-camera-manufacturer-brand lens for your photographic camera? The tertiary party lens may have better quality – with improve epitome quality beingness an particularly attractive advantage. The third party lens may have an of import feature that the photographic camera brand does not offer – a unique focal length range for example. Or, the third political party lens may be less expensive.

That last reason is the most common reason people buy third party lenses. And information technology is the primary reason to buy the 70-200 VC over the Canon equivalent lens. If you lot tin beget it, the Canon EF 70-200mm f/ii.eight L IS II USM Lens remains my strong recommendation for a lens in this class.

If you budget is not strong enough for the Canon, I highly recommend the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Lens. While it is not an inexpensive lens itself, the 70-200 VC delivers epitome quality worthy of its price. This lens is going to evangelize some peachy images.

Bringing y'all this site is my full-time task (typically 60-eighty hours per calendar week). Thus, I depend solely on the commissions received from you using the links on this site to make any buy. I am grateful for your support! - Bryan

My Recommended Tamron lxx-200mm f/ii.8 Di VC USD Lens Retailers

Rent the Tamron lxx-200mm f/two.8 Di VC USD Lens

The Tip Jar

More Tamron seventy-200mm f/ii.8 Di VC USD Lens Related Data

Bryan Recommends Ownership It Here

jenkinsdivictlerner.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-70-200mm-f-2.8-Di-VC-USD-Lens-Review.aspx

Share this post