Tamron AF 55-200mm f/4-5.6 Di II LD

[ettlz]

There doesn't seem to be a sample archive for the Tamron AF 55-200mm f/4-5.6 Di II LD in the forum, so I thought I might start one. Here are a few of mine (click for the Flickr page to get to larger versions, more shooting parameters, etc.; I might add 100% crops later). The following were taken with a 400D.

A thistle somewhere in Dorset (200mm, f/5.6, 1/500s, ISO 200)
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1009/1259751567_e74f2a772c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ettlz/1259751567/)

Flower macro (200mm, f/5.6, 1/640s, ISO 100)
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1224/1151307812_71093a2126.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ettlz/1151307812/)

Calshot Spit coastguard tower (55mm, f/8, 1/320s, ISO 200)
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1284/1116590437_b61ce7707c.jpg
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/ettlz/1116590437/)

[asylumxl]

I'll add some.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1049/1116117916_34e9bea3be_o.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/210/515132871_a5c1d27c9a_o.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/146/396739537_b49950cb9b_o.jpg

[buzzyrabbit]

Just one i took of a guy at a local dog show. He was surrounded by a crowd, but i manage to nick a picture from about 50 feet.

[ettlz]

Just one i took of a guy at a local dog show.Was the show called "Bone Idol", by any chance? ;)

[madhatter04]

Ettlz... rotten tomatoes for you! hahah!
Lens looks nice and sharp!

[ettlz]

Some 100% crops for those interested. (DPP 3.0.2.6, sharpness 3. Of course, the 100kib upload limit doesn't help with JPEG quality.)

[JimMcrae]

The wasp pic was taken within a week of getting my first dslr - about 2 months ago - and the Tamron was part of the package for my 400d. It was a hand-held shot in reasonable light.

The wee girl was an off-the-cuff pic - point and shoot with little regard to settings and white balance all wrong - and only happened because I had dropped my camera (no comments please) and trashed my nifty fifty, so just happened to have the Tamron fitted. It was taken indoors in low light from the window.

After buying the 400d I got a 100-400L and the nifty 50 and although I decided to keep the Tamron for macro stuff, I never really used it at all until I done in the 50mm 1.8.

I have now replaced the nifty fifty with the 50mm 1.4, but am really impressed with some of my Tamron shots - so much so, I intended starting a thread about it to gauge the general feeling about it here. As I've stated, I'm a complete novice so if the pics are complete crap, feel free to say so - but please tell me why!

Incidentaly, I tried a wee comparison test with my Tamron and the 100-400, both on 200mm and identical settings, both on a tripod and the 100-400 only just scraped it on IQ. In saying that, the pics were of crows in a field and didn't require fast AF. I'd like to hear your comment?

Cheers

[buzzyrabbit]

Its a super little telezoom for the money.It only costs around £100. I got mine in a " Jessups" deal.

[RexC]

asylumxl: that first photo is AWESOME! If I had seen that before buying my 70-200 2.8, I would have had serious doubts about spending so much money.

I suppose it just shows that great photos depend on so much more than which lens/body is used. The colors are just so vivid (I know that it's been post processed, but what great colors have resulted).

[BettyJW]

Here's one of mine:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3030/3084846093_58bb185117_o.jpg