Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
Thread started 06 Nov 2013 (Wednesday) 17:48
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Help me decide on which 70-200 and why?

 
Rush87
Senior Member
Avatar
291 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Qc
     
Nov 07, 2013 08:33 |  #16

YashicaFX2 wrote in post #16431146 (external link)
The Σ50-150 is the same size as the 70-200 and won't work on FF. What's the point?

I have the Σ70-200 OS. Read Talley's review of the Tamron VC. You'll take the Sigma right off your list.

I have the Sigma 70-200. It's far from bad and is definitely usable at 2.8. It's less expansive than the Tamron and is closer to a true 200mm.

gremlin75 wrote in post #16431350 (external link)
Its sharp, great IQ, has beautiful bokeh, gives a 'FF 70-200mm field of view' to crop shooter, and is less expensive then any of the 70-200 f2.8 choices

As a crop shooter it is an amazing choice and one that shouldn't be over looked.

To the OP. Of the two choice you gave I'd go with the tamron. Its proving itself to be a great lens and when you need f2.8 it's there

This. OP has a 60D.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digitalduck
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
599 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Fargo, ND
     
Nov 07, 2013 08:52 |  #17

Awesome everyone, thank you! So regarding weight of the Tamron, I'm borrowing my friends canon 70-200 IS 2.8 this week for th first time and how does the weight of the Tamron compare since I'm getting used to this size. Heavier or lighter?

Thanks!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick5
Goldmember
Avatar
3,345 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 370
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
     
Nov 07, 2013 09:11 |  #18

Had the chance to play with the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC in New York at PhotoPlus Expo.
Basically half the cost of the Canon Mark II and about the same weight. Very impressive, especially the cost.
Since I do not own the Tamron lens personally, I can give you personal opinions of the two Canon IS 70-200's you are considering. Since I wanted to travel light the day of the show in New York, I decided to pull out the 70-200 f/4 L IS and put it in my shoulder bag for the day. Boy how much lighter it is, razor sharp, image quality is top notch. Wonderful lens.
However like many, I needed (lusted) the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS Mark II. Wow! Has not disappointed at all.
If money and weight are the issue by all means go for the Canon f/4 L IS. I still have both and that says a lot about both of them.


Canon 5D Mark III (x2), BG-E11 Grips, 7D (x2) BG-E7 Grips, Canon Lenses 16-35 f/4 L IS, 17-40 f/4 L, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II, 70-200 f/4 L IS, 70-200 f/4 L IS Version II, 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS Version II, TS-E 24 f/3.5 L II, 100 f/2.8 L Macro IS, 10-22 f3.5-4.5, 17-55 f/2.8 L IS, 85 f/1.8, Canon 1.4 Extender III, 5 Canon 600 EX-RT, 2 Canon ST-E3 Transmitters, Canon PRO-300 Printer

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
michgirl
Goldmember
1,311 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 61
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Michigan
     
Nov 07, 2013 09:48 |  #19

digitalduck wrote in post #16431895 (external link)
Awesome everyone, thank you! So regarding weight of the Tamron, I'm borrowing my friends canon 70-200 IS 2.8 this week for th first time and how does the weight of the Tamron compare since I'm getting used to this size. Heavier or lighter?

Thanks!

Amazon lists the Tamron VC as 3.2 lbs. and the Canon IS as 2.9 lbs. The Canon f/4 IS listed as 1.7lbs.


Robin
Canon 6d / EF Lens: 24mm-105mm / 40mm f/2.8 / 28mm f/1.8 / 50mm f/1.8 / 85mm 1.8 / EF 70-300mm II USM
Canon T6i / EFs Lens: 24mm Pancake / 18-55mm STM / 18-135mm STM / 55-250mm STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,277 posts
Likes: 108
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Nov 07, 2013 10:05 |  #20

There really are only a few things to consider, choosing among all the 70-200s that are offered...

1. How much can you spend?

2. How big and heavy a lens are you willing to lug around?

3. Will you need top AF speed and accuracy for action photography?

The Canon 70-200mm f4s are a bit smaller and lighter than all the f2.8 lenses... about 2/3 the size and weight. Both the non-IS and IS versions are sharp. The IS version is the newer and offers some fo the best IQ of any 70-200. The Canon f4 zooms also sell without tripod mounting rings, but accessory rings are available (at additional cost, of course). The Canon tripod rings are fairly pricey. Third party clones. Both the Canon f4 are very fast and accurate focusing, with USM.

The Canon 70-200mm f2.8s are bigger and heavier. Both include a tripod mounting ring. The f2.8 non-IS is the oldest of the Canon 70-200 quartet and is a bit of a compromise on IQ, but has fast, accurate USM focus. The 70-200/2.8 IS Mark II is the latest and greatest, with top IQ, and priced to match. The now-discontinued 70-200/2.8 IS "Mark I" is still a very good lens if you can find one new-old-stock or used. If buying used, keep in mind that these are real workhorse lenses that few pros would be without, so you might watch out for copies that have had hard use.

Neither Sigma nor Tamron has offered lighter weight, f4 versions. But both have offered larger, heavier f2.8 70-200s. In fact, all the f2.8 zooms are relatively close to the same size and weight. Not enough difference to matter.

I don't know a lot about the Sigma 70-200/2.8s... there have been several versions, with and without OS (Sigma's version of IS), perhaps with and without HSM (Sigma's version of USM). If buying new, their current version has both.

Tamron 70-200/2.8 has also been offered in a couple versions over the years. The current version has VC (Tamron's version of IS) and USD (their version of USM). Again, I have tried it and can't compare IQ, focus performance, VC effectiveness. I have used other Tamron lenses over the years and generally find their quality quite high... but their AF performance has been a bit slower. They have been upgrading their lenses to USD fcous drive, which is supposed to help.

Someone mentioned the Sigma 50-150/2.8 HSM OS, too. I seem to recall it was also offered in non-OS version... maybe non-HSM, too. The thing I find odd about this lens is that it's a crop only lens that's just about the same size and weight as their 70-200/2.8 HSM OS that works on both crop and FF. I guess I'm just not sure what purpose the 50-150 serves... it if were smaller and lighter it might makes some sense, as a crop only alternative. But since it's the same size, the only diff I see is a somewhat lower price tag.

If I were considering either the Sigma or Tamron, I'd check out their IQ of course, but I'd try to compare their focus performance in particular. HSM and USD are supposed to be similar to USM, but that doesn't always seem to be the case.

Whether or not you need stabilization (whether on the Canon, Sigma or Tamron) really comes down to price... If you can afford it, get it. Period. It can be very helpful on these tele-zooms... especially if used on a crop sensor camera.

I currently am using 70-200/2.8 IS "Mark I" (for about 12 years) and 70-200/4 IS (for less than a year). Eventually I'll upgrade to the 70-200/2.8 IS Mark II, but am not in a big rush to do so.


Alan Myers (external link) "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
5DII, 7DII, 7D, M5 & others. 10-22mm, Meike 12/2.8,Tokina 12-24/4, 20/2.8, EF-M 22/2, TS 24/3.5L, 24-70/2.8L, 28/1.8, 28-135 IS (x2), TS 45/2.8, 50/1.4, Sigma 56/1.4, Tamron 60/2.0, 70-200/4L IS, 70-200/2.8 IS, 85/1.8, Tamron 90/2.5, 100/2.8 USM, 100-400L II, 135/2L, 180/3.5L, 300/4L IS, 300/2.8L IS, 500/4L IS, EF 1.4X II, EF 2X II. Flashes, strobes & various access. - FLICKR (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sibil
Cream of the Crop
10,415 posts
Likes: 54435
Joined Jan 2009
Location: SoCal
     
Nov 07, 2013 11:14 as a reply to  @ amfoto1's post |  #21

^^^^^
A very good summary




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
uOpt
Goldmember
Avatar
2,283 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Boston, MA, USA
     
Nov 07, 2013 11:28 |  #22

digitalduck wrote in post #16430528 (external link)
Hi guys,

So it’s getting close to upgrading lens time.. I won’t be able to do it till Jan, but I had a taste of my friends 70-200 2.8is canon version and can see how that improves my shots in the areas that im looking for improvement. Im basically only using my 50mm prime.. I also have my 55-250, but rarely use it and would sell it. After reading and watching reviews I have noticed that the Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC holds its own very well. Especially with the savings I would get over the 2.8 Canon 70-200 I could invest that in other areas.

I have seen some inamges of the Tamron and they look respectably sharp. Am I missing something or is there a F4 Tamron? Also, I know others have said that the Canon 70-200 f4 IS is very sharp for what it is and that most don’t need 2.8. My biggest thing, just like everyone else, are sharpness (of course) and a shallow DOF.
So that’s where im at:

Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC or
Canon 70-200 f4 IS

I do like have a very shallow depth of field, but does anyone have a decent portrait example of the canon at f4? Also, I (may) be able to sell my 60D and pick up either a 6D or whatever FF is close enough and not too expensive.. Would going from the 60D to the 6D be a big enough improvement to warrant the change ro do I wait?

Thoughts?
Thanks!

Focal length matters more to making the subject stand out than aperture. One f-stop doesn't make that much of a difference on background blur, but completely shredding the background on a headshot @ 200mm (35mm equivalent) will.

The change to the bigger sensor is more in the former category, although myself I don't like the 60/7d/rebel sensor. 70-200 is kind of annoying on crop unless you go after wildlife or airshows.

There really isn't anything wrong with the Canon f/4 IS, except that you just cannot keep exposure time down, which is a problem when the subject moves.


My imagine composition sucks. I need a heavier lens.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
YashicaFX2
Goldmember
1,003 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2013
Location: A quiet place in the country.
     
Nov 07, 2013 11:48 |  #23
bannedPermanent ban

Rush87 wrote in post #16431849 (external link)
I have the Sigma 70-200. It's far from bad and is definitely usable at 2.8. It's less expansive than the Tamron and is closer to a true 200mm.

This. OP has a 60D.

What? I referenced the Sigma 50-150, not the 70-200. Then I said I have the 70-200, which by all evidence could be better. The price difference between the Sigma OS and the Tamron VC is $200. The POINT of a 2.8 lens is to shoot it at f/2.8. The Tamron performs better here, according to all indications. I think f/2.8 IQ is important in an f/2.8 lens. If I were buying today, I would pass on the Sigma I already own, and look at the Tamron and the EFII.

BTW, it is the Sigma that is noticeably shorter than 200mm, not the Tamron. I have a 60D, too. Is that relevant here?


Dedicated APS-c shooter. Gripped 60D, 60 2.8, 10-22, 15-85, Σ70-200 OS and a big white something or other! Plus a 5D w/28-75.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digitalduck
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
599 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Fargo, ND
     
Nov 07, 2013 11:59 |  #24

Wow guys awesome adivce.. so if im doing mostly portrait right now, and the occasional landscarpe, maternity etc.. I like the price of the Canon F4 non IS but I havent reallly practiced without IS.. I am using a freinds 70-200 IS 2,8 this weekend and wil turn off IS and see how I do..

Price wise I like the Canon F4 IS or non.. but that Tamron is tempting although the 2.8 VC is close to the price of the Canon f4 IS.. my thing is just sharpness and using focal length to make the subject pop as uOpt mentioned earlier. I will have to rent it..




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digitalduck
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
599 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Fargo, ND
     
Nov 07, 2013 12:00 |  #25

YashicaFX2 wrote in post #16432285 (external link)
BTW, it is the Sigma that is noticeably shorter than 200mm, not the Tamron. I have a 60D, too. Is that relevant here?

Very relevant, becuase that's what im shooting on :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
uOpt
Goldmember
Avatar
2,283 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Boston, MA, USA
     
Nov 07, 2013 16:40 |  #26

digitalduck wrote in post #16432326 (external link)
Wow guys awesome adivce.. so if im doing mostly portrait right now, and the occasional landscarpe, maternity etc.. I like the price of the Canon F4 non IS but I havent reallly practiced without IS.. I am using a freinds 70-200 IS 2,8 this weekend and wil turn off IS and see how I do..

The IS and non-IS versions of Canon's f/4 are significantly different. It's much more than IS.


My imagine composition sucks. I need a heavier lens.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ceegee
Goldmember
2,334 posts
Likes: 26
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Montreal, Quebec
     
Nov 07, 2013 16:54 |  #27

Unless you absolutely need f2.8 and don't mind the weight of the f2.8 lenses, it's very hard to beat the 70-200 f4 IS. It's an outstanding lens in every respect - it does everything well, from sports to portraits. I sold my f2.8 non-IS mainly because of weight considerations, and replaced it with the f4 IS. I've never, for one second, regretted doing this. The lens is a star.


Gear: Canon R10, Canon RFS 18-150, Canon RF 100-400

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gremlin75
Goldmember
Avatar
2,738 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 226
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Nov 07, 2013 19:58 as a reply to  @ ceegee's post |  #28

amfoto1 wrote in post #16432053 (external link)
Someone mentioned the Sigma 50-150/2.8 HSM OS, too. I seem to recall it was also offered in non-OS version... maybe non-HSM, too. The thing I find odd about this lens is that it's a crop only lens that's just about the same size and weight as their 70-200/2.8 HSM OS that works on both crop and FF. I guess I'm just not sure what purpose the 50-150 serves... it if were smaller and lighter it might makes some sense, as a crop only alternative. But since it's the same size, the only diff I see is a somewhat lower price tag.

Like I said earlier; Its sharp (the sigma 50-150 OS), great IQ, has beautiful bokeh, gives a 'FF 70-200mm field of view' to crop shooter, and is less expensive then any of the 70-200 f2.8 choices.

The second to last point (the field of view) is a big one for crop shooters. In doors 70mm is quite long where 50mm can be very useable. The 50-150 OS is a damn big lens though. The older non-OS version is far smaller. My guess is sigma used the same lens barrel as their 70-200 to save production on costs. Still, couple the 50-150 OS with their 18-35 f1.8 and you have an amazing crop combo!!

digitalduck wrote in post #16432326 (external link)
I am using a freinds 70-200 IS 2,8 this weekend and wil turn off IS and see how I do..

A word of warning with that. The f4 is quite a bit lighter then the f2.8 so hand holding with the f2.8 will be a little tougher then with the f4.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

3,581 views & 0 likes for this thread, 16 members have posted to it.
Help me decide on which 70-200 and why?
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.55forum software
version 2.55 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is marthabrand134
759 guests, 152 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.