Has anyone compared the AF speed and tracking capabilities of the Tamron 70-300 VC against the 55-250? Just curious how they compare.
tkbslc Cream of the Crop 24,604 posts Likes: 45 Joined Nov 2008 Location: Utah, USA More info | Jul 27, 2012 14:13 | #1 Has anyone compared the AF speed and tracking capabilities of the Tamron 70-300 VC against the 55-250? Just curious how they compare. Taylor
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jul 27, 2012 18:16 | #2 Cameras: 7D2, S100
LOG IN TO REPLY |
kwando Goldmember  1,345 posts Likes: 1 Joined Aug 2008 Location: Aurora, Co More info | Jul 27, 2012 18:33 | #3 Tamron is faster and more quiet ~Simon~
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tkbslc THREAD STARTER Cream of the Crop 24,604 posts Likes: 45 Joined Nov 2008 Location: Utah, USA More info | Jul 27, 2012 19:54 | #4 Thanks for the input kwando. Yeah, the newest 70-300 with VC and the "USD" autofocus. Taylor
LOG IN TO REPLY |
ScubaDude Goldmember  1,104 posts Likes: 7 Joined Sep 2011 Location: Waveland, MS More info | Jul 27, 2012 20:14 | #5  Permanent banHaving owned both, I can say that the Tamron is better in every respect, and by a wide margin. Canon [7D & BG-E7 grip] [T1i & BG-E5 grip] [400mm f/5.6L] [50mm f/1.8 II] [18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS]
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jul 27, 2012 20:20 | #6 Yeah it is the one weakness of the 55-250, the AF can be slow and hunts a lot, even on things I think it should be locking on to fairly easily. The IQ to cost ratio is pretty good though. You can tell from my sig how I finally fixed that problem Cameras: 7D2, S100
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jul 27, 2012 20:56 | #7 ScubaDude wrote in post #14779572  Having owned both, I can say that the Tamron is better in every respect, and by a wide margin. Agreed. I've owned both and find the tamron to be a better all around lens.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Had both at the same time but preferred the two-fifty for the IQ. Although I was not shooting anything that required tracking. I really wanted to like the Tamron as the AF was faster focusing and the build is far superior but the output head to head was disapointing. R6 | R7 | 15-85is | Rokinon 14 2.8 | RF 16 2.8 | 16-35 F4is L | RF 24-105 F4is L | RF 70-200 F4is L | 100-400 II L | Σ150-600 C | 1.4X III | 2X III | 430ex |
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jul 27, 2012 21:51 | #9 The tamron has the added bonus of working on FF should you ever consider that option. IQ is good to really good on FF. Sony A7siii/A7iv/ZV-1 - FE 24/1.4 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 - 28-200 RXD
LOG IN TO REPLY |
GregoryF Goldmember  2,336 posts Likes: 13 Joined Jul 2010 Location: Bella Vista, AR More info | Jul 27, 2012 22:28 | #10 ct1co2 wrote in post #14779768 Had both at the same time but preferred the two-fifty for the IQ. Although I was not shooting anything that required tracking. I really wanted to like the Tamron as the AF was faster focusing and the build is far superior but the output head to head was disapointing. My Tamron is noticebly sharper than my 55-250IS. 6D, 5D, 7Dii, Eos R and too many lenses, flashes and aux. gear to list!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Cesium Goldmember 1,967 posts Likes: 1 Joined Jun 2009 More info | Jul 27, 2012 23:35 | #11 tkbslc wrote in post #14779521 I'm basically looking for an affordable way to get a bit better tracking focus than my 55-250, but I don't want to lose IS and the reach by going to a 70-200 F4 The Tamron is indeed faster to AF, but not by a huge margin. It also hunts like the 55-250 in some situations. The 70-200 blows them both out of the water in AF speed.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tkbslc THREAD STARTER Cream of the Crop 24,604 posts Likes: 45 Joined Nov 2008 Location: Utah, USA More info | Jul 28, 2012 00:01 | #12 Cesium wrote in post #14780121 The Tamron is indeed faster to AF, but not by a huge margin. It also hunts like the 55-250 in some situations. The 70-200 blows them both out of the water in AF speed. Well I have a 70-210 USM, which is at least as fast as the 70-200, but I miss IS and the reach. I don't have $1200 for the F4 IS or the 70-300L right now. (And I think my fridge is dying, so I might even have negative money!) Taylor
LOG IN TO REPLY |
danielb59 Mostly Lurking 17 posts Joined Jun 2012 More info | Jul 28, 2012 09:10 | #13 Never had the 55-250, but presently own the Tamron. Previously had the Sigma 70-300. Tamron is head and shoulders better in almost every respect. 6D, 60D Gripped, Rokinon 7.5, Canon 24-105 4.0 L, Canon 50 1.8, Canon 85 1.8, canon 17-40 4.0 L, Sigma 17-70 2.8-4, Canon 100 2.8 L macro, Tamron 70-300 4-5.6, Sigma 170-500 5-6.3
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such! 2795 guests, 134 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
