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 12 Nov 2016 (Saturday) 20:11
Search threadPrev/next
POLL: "Which one"
Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
16
76.2%
Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC
4
19%
Something Else
1
4.8%

21 voters, 21 votes given (1 choice only choices can be voted per member)). VOTING IS FOR MEMBERS ONLY.
BROWSE ALL POLLS
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 70-200 f/2.L IS II vs Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC

 
raptor3x
Senior Member
Avatar
728 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 78
Joined Aug 2011
Location: Rutland, VT
     
Nov 20, 2016 08:13 |  #31

To the OP, another option is to pick up a used Tamron to test out. I see there's at least one copy over in the FS section with an $800 asking price.


Bodies: X-T1, E-M1ii, G9 Lenses: µ.Z 7-14 2.8, µ.Z 12-40 2.8, µ.Z 25 1.2, X 18-55 2.8-4, µ.Z 40-150 2.8, µ.Z 45 1.2, µ.Z 60 2.8, µ.Z 75 1.8, PL 200 2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2739
Joined Oct 2015
Post edited over 3 years ago by Bassat.
     
Nov 20, 2016 08:16 |  #32

raptor3x wrote in post #18189633 (external link)
Not sure where the Tamron falls but the Canon actually increases in focal length to ~230mm near MFD.

Calling BS. Source, please.

EDIT:
BS call retracted. See below. :oops:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
raptor3x
Senior Member
Avatar
728 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 78
Joined Aug 2011
Location: Rutland, VT
Post edited over 3 years ago by raptor3x. (2 edits in all)
     
Nov 20, 2016 08:20 |  #33

Bassat wrote in post #18189641 (external link)
Calling BS. Source, please.

That it increases in focal length or that it hits ~230mm? Below image shows the lens at the same distance from the target but focused at infinity (left) and MFD (right) stopped down to f/32 so you can make out the target.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Bodies: X-T1, E-M1ii, G9 Lenses: µ.Z 7-14 2.8, µ.Z 12-40 2.8, µ.Z 25 1.2, X 18-55 2.8-4, µ.Z 40-150 2.8, µ.Z 45 1.2, µ.Z 60 2.8, µ.Z 75 1.8, PL 200 2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2739
Joined Oct 2015
     
Nov 20, 2016 08:37 |  #34

I deleted my first response to your examples. Total mis-read on my part.

Compelling evidence, I must say. How does this work, especially when most other lenses go the opposite (shorter) direction? Do other Canon lenses do this? My 70-200 f/4L IS?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
raptor3x
Senior Member
Avatar
728 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 78
Joined Aug 2011
Location: Rutland, VT
Post edited over 3 years ago by raptor3x.
     
Nov 20, 2016 08:41 |  #35

Bassat wrote in post #18189656 (external link)
I deleted my first response to your examples. Total mis-read on my part.

Compelling evidence, I must say. How does this work, especially when most other lenses go the opposite (shorter) direction? Do other Canon lenses do this? My 70-200 f/4L IS?

I honestly don't know enough about optics to say why it works this way. As for the 70-200 f/4 IS, I don't remember how it behaves but it should be pretty obvious if it behaves the same way. The magnification ratio and MFD suggests it should but it should be easier to confirm if you have the lens on hand.

BTW, probably wasn't a misread, I forgot to add that both shots were at the same distance when I initially posted and only added that in an edit.


Bodies: X-T1, E-M1ii, G9 Lenses: µ.Z 7-14 2.8, µ.Z 12-40 2.8, µ.Z 25 1.2, X 18-55 2.8-4, µ.Z 40-150 2.8, µ.Z 45 1.2, µ.Z 60 2.8, µ.Z 75 1.8, PL 200 2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2739
Joined Oct 2015
Post edited over 3 years ago by Bassat.
     
Nov 20, 2016 08:45 as a reply to  @ raptor3x's post |  #36

Now I am totally confused. My EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM does the same thing. I just shot from 8' to subject (thanks for the f/32 tip) at both MFD and infinity. The subject in the MFD shot is 20-30% larger. I retract my BS call.

I remember trying the same thing a few years ago with my Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 OS HSM. I could swear that one got shorter at MFD, not longer like the Canons. Anyone have an explanation a normal person could understand?

EDIT:
Figured I'd add my shots to the mix/proof. EXIF on-screen. First is at MFD. Second is at infinity. Both shots taken from the exact same location about 8' from Bob.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
     
Nov 20, 2016 12:51 |  #37

Bassat wrote in post #18189656 (external link)
Compelling evidence, I must say. How does this work, especially when most other lenses go the opposite (shorter) direction? Do other Canon lenses do this? My 70-200 f/4L IS?

My educated guess is that Canon uses an extra compensating group they also use to boost maximum magnification.


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,370 posts
Gallery: 555 photos
Likes: 2657
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Nov 21, 2016 22:03 |  #38

CheshireCat wrote in post #18189840 (external link)
My educated guess is that Canon uses an extra compensating group they also use to boost maximum magnification.

Probubly. and for me MM is important due to some things id use it for (butterflies came to mind as another example, You dont always need a macro lens, butterflies are larger insects in some cases and skittish meaning my 100mm macro isnt quite long enough, in fact the couple butterfly shots i have were done with the 70-200 f/4L IS)

Luna had to come home a little sooner than expected. So for now im making due with the 50mm f/1.4 because well.... you'll see her lol. I also met her family. Corgis are definitely faster than one would expect

One reason for the 70-200 is becoming obvious, i can stay farther away from her so she wont nom on the lens hood -_- of course the 50mm f/1.4 is a great indoor lens! But the moment i got outside yeah, its painfully obvious its not the right lens for the job outside as i suspected from the start

The 7DII is definitely the right camera tho. Silent continuous seems like a godsend right about now


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,088 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2776
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Nov 25, 2016 11:16 |  #39

Canon V3 is coming soon...

I sold the Tamron recently. Great lens... lost alot of money on that one and the buyer got a killer deal.


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
     
Nov 25, 2016 11:33 |  #40

Talley wrote in post #18194296 (external link)
Canon V3 is coming soon...

What makes you so sure ?


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dochollidayda
Goldmember
1,129 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2076
Joined Aug 2012
     
Nov 25, 2016 11:51 |  #41

Agree with Talley there. There is a CR2 rumor already, Nikon is already out and Canon will not be left behind, especially now that they know they can sell the lens for 3K. Its a bread and butter lens and there is boatloads of money to be made there.


flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,088 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2776
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Nov 25, 2016 12:11 |  #42

dochollidayda wrote in post #18194336 (external link)
Agree with Talley there. There is a CR2 rumor already, Nikon is already out and Canon will not be left behind, especially now that they know they can sell the lens for 3K. Its a bread and butter lens and there is boatloads of money to be made there.

Don't be so sure.... canon is left behind long ago for a stabilized 2.8 24-70


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,088 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2776
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Nov 25, 2016 12:12 |  #43

CheshireCat wrote in post #18194316 (external link)
What makes you so sure ?

Just a hunch


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
     
Nov 25, 2016 12:30 |  #44

dochollidayda wrote in post #18194336 (external link)
Agree with Talley there. There is a CR2 rumor already, Nikon is already out and Canon will not be left behind, especially now that they know they can sell the lens for 3K. Its a bread and butter lens and there is boatloads of money to be made there.

Don't hold your breath. Rumors are always spread (on purpose) when competitors are announcing a new lens. This is part of the marketing war.

Nikon came up with the new lens to catch up with the current Canon lens, and the Canon lens is so good that I don't see any reason for a minor improvement at +50% price boost. Pro photographers won't update unless there is a strong reason for it, so what would that reason be ?


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,370 posts
Gallery: 555 photos
Likes: 2657
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Nov 25, 2016 22:43 |  #45

CheshireCat wrote in post #18194382 (external link)
Don't hold your breath. Rumors are always spread (on purpose) when competitors are announcing a new lens. This is part of the marketing war.

Nikon came up with the new lens to catch up with the current Canon lens, and the Canon lens is so good that I don't see any reason for a minor improvement at +50% price boost. Pro photographers won't update unless there is a strong reason for it, so what would that reason be ?

This. The Canon was already so far ahead of the Nikon it wasnt funny. The new Nikon is nice, but its also $2800

Even IF the Canon came out Feburary, id suspect at least 2800, if not 3000 price tag, im choking on the $1950 i just spent...Welcome to my most expensive lens...

The IS II will still be a great lens, with a lot of users on here

In other news after trying to "make do" repeatedly with the 50mm f/1.4 and the 100L I said to heck with this and ordered the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II

The 100L just isnt made to focus and track this way, its fast sure, and its a darn good lens, but its not for this. The FL is either too short, or a bit too long outside

The 50mm is too slow focusing, its great for still subjects, indoors, when shes sedate, produces excellent images, but its a bit short outside most of the time


Problem with both primes of course is that i have to plant myself in just the right spot and i get a very narrow "area" where i can nail her before shes too close.

The 70-200 i should be able to anchor myself farther back and swing from 200-70 as she runs towards me and get a lovely series of images and the AF motor should easily handle her, I remember the same problems with Skye and the 70-200 f/4L fixed those issues, the f/2.8L is even better


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

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

16,080 views & 6 likes for this thread
Canon 70-200 f/2.L IS II vs Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC
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 KellyLaundromat
432 guests, 279 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.