The New Tamron 70-200 isnt a 70-200 Apparently... But Otherwise Sharp

Blubayou wrote in post #15339188
It appears that the estimate of 175mm was off. Roger replied to my question and said that it actually tested out to 186mm for the Tamron vs 199mm for the Canon, so it's not as short as they originally thought.

Will the website be updated is the question?

Blubayou wrote in post #15339188
It appears that the estimate of 175mm was off. Roger replied to my question and said that it actually tested out to 186mm for the Tamron vs 199mm for the Canon, so it's not as short as they originally thought.

im shocked that 14mm makes that big a difference in a telephoto

I'll use my 70-200 IS II for a few years, then find a good deal on a used tammy 70-200 VC, then sell the canon if the price difference between used is over $600~700

The tammy 70-200 without VC was already a stunning lens optically speaking.

genjurok wrote in post #15339311
I'll probably use my 70-200 IS II for a few years, then find a good deal on the Tamron 70-200 VC, then sell the 70-200 IS II.

I had the 70-200 Tamron without VC. Its PQ is already stunning. I have full confidence in Tamron zooms.

genjurok wrote in post #15339475
I'll use my 70-200 IS II for a few years, then find a good deal on a used tammy 70-200 VC, then sell the canon if the price difference between used is over $600~700

The tammy 70-200 without VC was already a stunning lens optically speaking.

So confident you had to post the same thing twice in an hour?

LowriderS10 wrote in post #15339515
So confident you had to post the same thing twice in an hour?

Ah... I see we have the post police.

davidc502 wrote in post #15339522


Ah... I see we have the post police.

Just observing, that's all haha...I was reading through this thread and thought "either I'm going crazy and having deja vu or this guy posted the same thing twice" haha

The digital picture has updated their site for the new Tamron.....

The crops are quite good IMHO. Is it going to take down the mighty Canon mk2? No, but what an alternative for the money.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0

davidc502 wrote in post #15349927
The crops are quite good IMHO. Is it going to take down the mighty Canon mk2? No, but what an alternative for the money.

That's why I'm a fan

Probably have a $100-200 rebate in a few months. That's the Tamron way.

It looks pretty darn sharp for the money.... It starts to get a little soft in the Extreme corners at 200mm, but other than that, through the range, it's about as good as the mk2.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0

While I'm not a huge fan of Popular Photography's lens tests (even though I'm a regular subscriber), they measure every tested lens for FL and actual aperture, etc.

Here is what they found for the Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, (and I'm sure soon they'll test the new Tamron too):
Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 OS
70–200MM (70.01–200.08mm tested), f/2.8 (f/2.76 tested)

I'm sure they test it at infinity though.

davidc502 wrote in post #15350333
It looks pretty darn sharp for the money.... It starts to get a little soft in the Extreme corners at 200mm, but other than that, through the range, it's about as good as the mk2.

Those corners would be gone on APS-C.

Although if it only goes to 180, I'd rather have a 50-150mm.

davidc502 wrote in post #15350333
It looks pretty darn sharp for the money.... It starts to get a little soft in the Extreme corners at 200mm, but other than that, through the range, it's about as good as the mk2.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0

Does not take a 2x very well though, im wondering if thats the converter used however...

It seems to be slightly better than the Sigma at every FL except at 200mm where they are very similar. I think I'll keep the Sigma