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
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 07 Feb 2014 (Friday) 00:06
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

quality differences

 
TJays
Goldmember
Avatar
1,311 posts
Likes: 122
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Los Angeles USA
     
Feb 07, 2014 08:48 |  #16

The tammy 70-200 f/2.8 lacks in low light, AI servo tracking, focus speed or hold better re-sale value compared to the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 II. But if your shooting as an hobbyist these minor drawbacks may not be a concern for you, then by all means go for a Tammy. But you will only find L glass in my camera bag for a reason, but this is my view only. Good luck with what ever lens you choose...


Regards
Terri Jean

5D4 Gripped-EOS 1DX Markll -600mm/4.0 II L-35-350mm/3.5 L-70-200/2.8 L-24-70mm/2.8 L-85mm/1.2 II L-50mm/1.2 L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Frodge
Goldmember
Avatar
3,085 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 146
Joined Nov 2012
     
Feb 07, 2014 08:59 |  #17

TJays wrote in post #16670599 (external link)
The tammy 70-200 f/2.8 lacks in low light, AI servo tracking, focus speed or hold better re-sale value compared to the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 II. But if your shooting as an hobbyist these minor drawbacks may not be a concern for you, then by all means go for a Tammy. But you will only find L glass in my camera bag for a reason, but this is my view only. Good luck with what ever lens you choose...

I'm not arguing with you. Everything has it's drawbacks. The 7d has drawbacks to other cameras made by Canon and so in and so forth. You can't beat a Tamron for the price. Just my 2 cents.
The plastic fantastic also has it's drawbacks. We all know this. But for $100, it's a non issue. I always read and research and ponder before I buy a lens. The most i ever did this was with the Tamron 17-50 non vc because I already owned the 18-55is. The one problem I saw about he tamron 17-50 over and over was te low light focusing capabilities. Honestly, I haven't seen it. I would tell you if I did. I'll be he first to admit something is less than what I've expected if I'm not happy with a purchase. But for $499, it's superb. The same goes for the 70-300vc.


_______________
“It's kind of fun to do the impossible.” - Walt Disney.
Equipment: Tokina 12-24mm, Canon 40mm 2.8, Tamron 17-50 2.8 XR Di, Canon 18-55mm, Canon 50mm 1.8, Tamron 70-300VC / T3I and 60D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
15,303 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 8963
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Canada
     
Feb 07, 2014 09:29 |  #18

I usually go to these two sites to get info on a lens. I've yet to be surprised by my purchase. I know the good things and the and bad things about each lens.

There are so many out there I got tired of cross referencing so I just use these 2 and get info on forums.

http://www.slrgear.com​/reviews/index.php (external link)

http://www.photozone.d​e/Reviews/overview (external link)

Make sure it states tested at SLRgear otherwise it is just peoples opinions which I have found pretty accurate. Some people like official testing. Tested lenses provide a blur index which shows the distortions at different apertures.

I have the 70-200 F4 IS and the 70-200 2.8 V2. The F4 has excellent IQ as the non IS version has. I have read the non IS edges out the IS model but I can't back that because I have never shot with it. I won't be worse that is for sure. Can't go wrong with either.

I had read a lot about the 2.8 V1. Not Canon's best so if IQ is important I'd steer clear of V1. Of course this is my opinion based on my research and IQ is different to each person. I'm very happy with the V2.

I owned the 24-105 for 6 years. I got a lot of mileage with that lens. It had seen a lot of the world. When stopped down it is capable of producing very sharp images. The problem stopping down is you lose bokeh. At f4 is suffered bit. It was horrible at 24mm. Barrel dist and bad CA. Those can be corrected but for group shots the people on the outsides never looked right.

I had been looking for a landscape lens for my FF for years. Lots of good ones like the TSE 24 and 17, the Zeiss 21 but too costly for specialized use for me. The 24-70 V2 came out. Not perfect but decent enough for landscapes and now is also my general workhorse. I sold my 24-105. If I had the cash to burn I would have kept is a walk around. I miss it for that. That is why I kept my 70-200 F4. Light travel zoom.

I had the 100 macro and sold that and my 85 1.8 to purchase the 100L macro IS. That lens is so sharp I have to carry band aides in my camera bag. I was not using my 85 that much. I lost a bit of speed and bokeh but gained IS. I think the MFT charts showed that the 100 at 2.8 was sharper than the 85 stopped down to 2.8.

L series lenses. I owned the 70-300 IS. A very capable good lens lens. I then tried out the 70-200 F4 and it did not take long to buy one. My friend who as not convinced of the IQ difference purchased my 70-300. One day he borrowed my 70-200 and a week later he purchased his own and sold the 70-300.

There is something about a good L lens that at times just can't be described in words. It has that edge over non L lenses. I'm not saying non L lenses are not good. There are many good ones like the 85 for example just like there a few L lenses that are OK. The 24-105 is an example.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jt354
Senior Member
401 posts
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Michigan
     
Feb 07, 2014 09:39 |  #19

A helpful, fairly unbiased review of the Tamron: http://www.the-digital-picture.com …i-VC-USD-Lens-Review.aspx (external link)


Zenfolio (external link)
flickr (external link)
Gear: Canon 60D / Canon G12 / Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 / Canon 35mm f/2 IS / Canon 85mm f/1.8 / Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 / Speedlite 430 EXII / Slik 700DX legs / Cullmann MB6 head

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick ­ Aufiero
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
462 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 87
Joined May 2013
Location: Tampa
     
Feb 07, 2014 11:51 |  #20

digital paradise wrote in post #16670683 (external link)
I usually go to these two sites to get info on a lens. I've yet to be surprised by my purchase. I know the good things and the and bad things about each lens.

There are so many out there I got tired of cross referencing so I just use these 2 and get info on forums.

http://www.slrgear.com​/reviews/index.php (external link)

http://www.photozone.d​e/Reviews/overview (external link)

Make sure it states tested at SLRgear otherwise it is just peoples opinions which I have found pretty accurate. Some people like official testing. Tested lenses provide a blur index which shows the distortions at different apertures.

I have the 70-200 F4 IS and the 70-200 2.8 V2. The F4 has excellent IQ as the non IS version has. I have read the non IS edges out the IS model but I can't back that because I have never shot with it. I won't be worse that is for sure. Can't go wrong with either.

I had read a lot about the 2.8 V1. Not Canon's best so if IQ is important I'd steer clear of V1. Of course this is my opinion based on my research and IQ is different to each person. I'm very happy with the V2.

I owned the 24-105 for 6 years. I got a lot of mileage with that lens. It had seen a lot of the world. When stopped down it is capable of producing very sharp images. The problem stopping down is you lose bokeh. At f4 is suffered bit. It was horrible at 24mm. Barrel dist and bad CA. Those can be corrected but for group shots the people on the outsides never looked right.

I had been looking for a landscape lens for my FF for years. Lots of good ones like the TSE 24 and 17, the Zeiss 21 but too costly for specialized use for me. The 24-70 V2 came out. Not perfect but decent enough for landscapes and now is also my general workhorse. I sold my 24-105. If I had the cash to burn I would have kept is a walk around. I miss it for that. That is why I kept my 70-200 F4. Light travel zoom.

I had the 100 macro and sold that and my 85 1.8 to purchase the 100L macro IS. That lens is so sharp I have to carry band aides in my camera bag. I was not using my 85 that much. I lost a bit of speed and bokeh but gained IS. I think the MFT charts showed that the 100 at 2.8 was sharper than the 85 stopped down to 2.8.

L series lenses. I owned the 70-300 IS. A very capable good lens lens. I then tried out the 70-200 F4 and it did not take long to buy one. My friend who as not convinced of the IQ difference purchased my 70-300. One day he borrowed my 70-200 and a week later he purchased his own and sold the 70-300.

There is something about a good L lens that at times just can't be described in words. It has that edge over non L lenses. I'm not saying non L lenses are not good. There are many good ones like the 85 for example just like there a few L lenses that are OK. The 24-105 is an example.

I really like this review. Very helpful.

The 70-200 is my main concern along with the macro.

That being said I need a good skateboarding lens and I really wanted to be as wide as like 15mm.

But the 24-105 seemed amazing since I can zoom close for detailed board shots and stuff.

I was gonna do the f4 70-200 originally but was concerned that it may not be open enough for single person shots at weddings. Maybe I'll browse pixel peeper for samples at f4


Is the newest f4 version what you have? Also I see that all the others are like 6-7 years old and the newest is the 2.8mkii and that's even 3 years old?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
15,303 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 8963
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Canada
     
Feb 07, 2014 12:05 |  #21

I do miss the range of the 24-105 as a walk around but it can be used for anything.

You definitely want speed at weddings and besides the 2.8 V2 is sharp wide open and you get nice bokeh. If you can live without 200mm the 135L is another good choice. If I had gone prime I'd own that lens.

There is only one f4 version of both the IS and non IS models. I have the 2.8 V2 which is the new version.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phantelope
Goldmember
Avatar
1,889 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 40
Joined Sep 2008
Location: NorCal
     
Feb 07, 2014 12:22 |  #22

the tammy statements here are a bit silly, unless one pixelpeeps test targets and other such useless in real life stuff. My 24-70 does everything I could ever want and has IS which is important to me.

I'd also get the 70-200 f4 unless you have a good reason for 2.8. Both are great lenses, but the f4 is a LOT smaller and lighter, I'd have to get yet an other bag if I'd have the 2.8. And I hardly ever even shoot at f4. Portrait, fashion, etc, the 2.8 can come in handy, but I use the 24-70 or primes for that.

I found the 2.8 just to be too big and heavy for travel and even walk around all day. And those extra stops certainly aren't worth the money to me, I'd hardly go that wide open. It might help in lower light for birding etc too, since the AF will get more light, I don't shoot wildlife much, so I never ran into that issue.

Think about what you want to do with your gear, if the 2.8 gives you something aside of 'looks cooler/bigger' then get it, otherwise buy something else nice or go out for a very fancy dinner or a mini vacation with the extra cash :-)


40D, 5D3, a bunch of lenses and other things :cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick ­ Aufiero
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
462 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 87
Joined May 2013
Location: Tampa
     
Feb 07, 2014 12:42 |  #23

phantelope wrote in post #16671196 (external link)
the tammy statements here are a bit silly, unless one pixelpeeps test targets and other such useless in real life stuff. My 24-70 does everything I could ever want and has IS which is important to me.

I'd also get the 70-200 f4 unless you have a good reason for 2.8. Both are great lenses, but the f4 is a LOT smaller and lighter, I'd have to get yet an other bag if I'd have the 2.8. And I hardly ever even shoot at f4. Portrait, fashion, etc, the 2.8 can come in handy, but I use the 24-70 or primes for that.

I found the 2.8 just to be too big and heavy for travel and even walk around all day. And those extra stops certainly aren't worth the money to me, I'd hardly go that wide open. It might help in lower light for birding etc too, since the AF will get more light, I don't shoot wildlife much, so I never ran into that issue.

Think about what you want to do with your gear, if the 2.8 gives you something aside of 'looks cooler/bigger' then get it, otherwise buy something else nice or go out for a very fancy dinner or a mini vacation with the extra cash :-)

Well like I said if I'm shooting weddings with natural light (which I normally don't ever use artificial) then I figured for single subject candid shots the 2.8 would be worth waiting for

Ya idk

Im impatient and I wanna get them all together but maybe I'll deal with the 24-105 and 100mm for now then save up the other grand for the 2.8II


-.-

That f4 is looks nice tho




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick ­ Aufiero
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
462 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 87
Joined May 2013
Location: Tampa
     
Feb 07, 2014 13:09 |  #24

Nick Aufiero wrote in post #16671277 (external link)
Well like I said if I'm shooting weddings with natural light (which I normally don't ever use artificial) then I figured for single subject candid shots the 2.8 would be worth waiting for

Ya idk

Im impatient and I wanna get them all together but maybe I'll deal with the 24-105 and 100mm for now then save up the other grand for the 2.8II


-.-

That f4 is looks nice tho

Also the 24-70 looks great but which should I get in place of the 24-105? Mki or mkii

I like the bit of a longer reach on the 105 but 2.8 would be nice for some skate shots




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Fred ­ Meebley
Senior Member
Avatar
320 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Likes: 240
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Wyoming
     
Feb 07, 2014 13:29 |  #25

An 85 f1.8 or 100 f2 (both are sharp and fast focusing) makes a great, inexpensive companion to the 70-200 f4is for when you need a bigger aperture. That puts you in the $1200 range instead of $1700 for a used 70-200 2.8 II




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick ­ Aufiero
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
462 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 87
Joined May 2013
Location: Tampa
     
Feb 07, 2014 14:03 |  #26

Fred Meebley wrote in post #16671420 (external link)
An 85 f1.8 or 100 f2 (both are sharp and fast focusing) makes a great, inexpensive companion to the 70-200 f4is for when you need a bigger aperture. That puts you in the $1200 range instead of $1700 for a used 70-200 2.8 II

I have the 50mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.8




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
15,303 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 8963
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Canada
     
Feb 07, 2014 14:10 |  #27

Nick Aufiero wrote in post #16671351 (external link)
Also the 24-70 looks great but which should I get in place of the 24-105? Mki or mkii

I like the bit of a longer reach on the 105 but 2.8 would be nice for some skate shots

I can't tell you anything about the MK1 but I sold my 24-105 to fund the MK2. I'm very happy with it.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
15,303 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 8963
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Canada
     
Feb 07, 2014 17:12 |  #28

I was busy before. Some of my first test shots with the 24-70 MK2

2.8 @ 24mm

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i33.photobucket​.com …s/d74/Zenon1/_S​7A8807.jpg (external link)


2.8 @ 70

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i33.photobucket​.com …d74/Zenon1/_S7A​8808-a.jpg (external link)


5.6 @ 70

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i33.photobucket​.com …s/d74/Zenon1/_S​7A8805.jpg (external link)


2.8 @ 24

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i33.photobucket​.com …1/_S7A8785-1.jpg~original (external link)

Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,161 views & 0 likes for this thread
quality differences
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

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

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 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is AstroNate
1344 guests, 258 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, 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.